Candlekeep Forum
Candlekeep Forum
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Active Polls | Members | Private Messages | Search | FAQ
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

 All Forums
 Realmslore
 Sages of Realmslore
 controversy
 New Topic  New Poll New Poll
 Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 2

royalsage
Acolyte

USA
5 Posts

Posted - 27 Jun 2005 :  00:01:11  Show Profile  Visit royalsage's Homepage Send royalsage a Private Message  Reply with Quote  Delete Topic
this came to me today and i pondered it for awhile and still nothing. What happens to still born babies and children to young to choose a patron god/goddess. certainly they wouldnt be put on the wall of the faithless. I dont see kelemvor doing this. Being lawful neutral he should see the injustice. so what happens do they go to their parents deity or maybe lathander who has birth in his portfolio.

Edited by - royalsage on 27 Jun 2005 01:42:40

Kentinal
Great Reader

4686 Posts

Posted - 27 Jun 2005 :  00:32:33  Show Profile Send Kentinal a Private Message  Reply with Quote
controversy will work better and you can edit the subject line.

[quote}What happens to still born babies and children to young to choose a paron god/goddess.[/quote]

There are faiths that acept the concept that still born or even children to the age 5 are not yet alive in a religious sense. That is did not have a soul yet.

Other theories can apply as to things like reincarnation because did not grow up enough to select a patron. That there is a deity that claims and protects such young souls (if such occured at birth or conception) that has not been named.


"Small beings can have small wisdom," the dragon said. "And small wise beings are better than small fools. Listen: Wisdom is caring for afterwards."
"Caring for afterwards ...? Ker repeated this without understanding.
"After action, afterwards," the dragon said. "Choose the afterwards first, then the action. Fools choose action first."
"Judgement" copyright 2003 by Elizabeth Moon
Go to Top of Page

Kuje
Great Reader

USA
7915 Posts

Posted - 27 Jun 2005 :  01:02:00  Show Profile Send Kuje a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Some of us once asked this of Rich Baker, he said Selune or Lathander most likely took care of them.

Ed has also given info on children and they usually "worship" the faiths of thier parents. Granted if the child is born dead then that wouldn't happen but I'd say Lathander would take it or the other deities of the other races that deal with birth or death would. :) But then you get into the problem of having Kelemvor being the deity of ALL the faithless and false so the deities of the other races are shoved into the corner and told to shut up. :)

Ed's children reply is in his 05 file. See da sig and do a search. :)

For some of us, books are as important as almost anything else on earth. What a miracle it is that out of these small, flat, rigid squares of paper unfolds world after world, worlds that sing to you, comfort and quiet and excite you... Books are full of the things that you don't get in real life - wonderful, lyrical language, for instance, right off the bat. - Anne Lamott, Bird by Bird

Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium

Edited by - Kuje on 27 Jun 2005 01:05:59
Go to Top of Page

cpthero2
Great Reader

USA
2285 Posts

Posted - 19 Feb 2020 :  15:50:24  Show Profile  Visit cpthero2's Homepage Send cpthero2 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Acolyte royalsage,

Fantastic question!

I noticed this was a pretty quiet room...lol.

Yeah, not only is this a huge moral and ethical issue in general but consider some ramifications:

Parents worship Torm, have child, child dies at two years old, but clearly doesn't worship: child separated from parents forever at time of infant death?

What is too young? If too young is 'x', is that 'x' proportionately weighted for the aging differential that exists with other races? Orcs live no longer than (40) years old [https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/wiki/Orc], and reach maturation between (11) and (14). So, if they are under 11 do they go to the wall? If so, short gestation cycle races, would have more kids, evil cults and religions such as the Cult of Shared Suffering, the Emerald Enclave, and others could kidnap them to achieve their aims, and in turn cause all manner of chaos. Some of those points of chaos could (and likely would) be:

  • Sacrifices for evil gods using the innocent to power their spells and thus goals
  • Using the kidnapping and sacrificing of said children to motivate people to leave an area so there is no further damage to the environment


If you think Loviatar followers/cults and the Emerald Enclave wouldn't do those things, then you would be wrong as they've done those very things, then look no further than the wonderful eco-terrorists known as the Emerald Enclave...they delight in murdering entire towns. In fact, if you want to go the extra mile on how just unbelievably bad some of these groups are, and don't even remotely get the real credit they deserve, look at the term used in parentheses on page 17 of Vilhon Reach regarding the annihilation of a community that was then blamed on followers of Talos (not sticking up for that deity, just a fact):

quote:
While the church has been accused of horrific actions (such as the cleansing of a startup community in Chondalwood in 1362, which was actually performed by the Emerald Enclave), they are guilty of some horrific actions of their own.(The Vilhon Reach, p.17)


"Cleansed"...yeah. I just w o n d e r what was meant by a parenthetical cleanse? Hmmmm? Tiny moustaches come to my mind for some reason....

Anyways...

This is an extremely interesting topic, and I find it fascinating to see how these obvious associations to real world history are regularly glossed over, i.e. "cleansing" when it comes to identifying just how absolutely evil and villainous these organizations are. I think it entertaining to include in wrapping up this controversy based scroll post I am making, the current Emerald Enclave listing at WotC, which stands just a wee little bit away from what I just posted and cited above:

quote:
The Emerald Enclave is a far-ranging group that opposes threats to the natural world and helps others survive the many perils of the wild. A ranger might be hired to lead a caravan through a treacherous mountain pass or the frozen tundra of Icewind Dale. A druid might volunteer to help a small village prepare for a long, brutal winter. Barbarians and witches who live like hermits most of the year might defend a town against marauding orcs or barbarians. Members of the Emerald Enclave know how to survive, and more importantly, they want to help others do the same. They are not opposed to civilization or progress, but they strive to prevent civilization and the wilderness from destroying one another.

Members of the Emerald Enclave are spread far and wide, and usually operate in isolation. They learn to depend on themselves more than others. Survival in a harsh world also demands great fortitude and mastery of certain fighting and survival skills. Members of the Enclave who dedicate themselves to helping others survive the perils of the wilderness are more social than others who are charged with defending sacred glades and preserving the natural balance.

BELIEFS
The natural order must be respected and preserved.
Forces that seek to upset the natural balance must be destroyed.
The wilderness can be harsh. Not everyone can survive in it without assistance.

GOALS
To restore and preserve the natural order, keep the elemental forces of the world in check, keep civilization and the wilderness from destroying one another, and help others survive the perils of the wilderness.


Awfully convenient that they left out the "cleansing" stuff, lol.

Best regards,






quote:
Originally posted by royalsage

this came to me today and i pondered it for awhile and still nothing. What happens to still born babies and children to young to choose a patron god/goddess. certainly they wouldnt be put on the wall of the faithless. I dont see kelemvor doing this. Being lawful neutral he should see the injustice. so what happens do they go to their parents deity or maybe lathander who has birth in his portfolio.


Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring
Go to Top of Page

Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
Moderator

USA
36784 Posts

Posted - 19 Feb 2020 :  16:43:12  Show Profile Send Wooly Rupert a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Can we stop with the ethical commentary? We don't know the circumstances of the cleansing of that one community -- for all we know, the people in this community were committing crimes against nature and thus prompted the Enclave to act. Or maybe it was just one or two members of the Enclave, in an unsanctioned act for which they were later punished.

We don't have enough information to judge, and even if we did, a single isolated action does not prove "they delight in murdering entire towns" or are "unbelievably bad."

This whole thing of "one single questionable thing about which we have limited information, taken in isolation and ignoring all other information, equals thorough and unrepentant evil!" is getting really old.

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!

Edited by - Wooly Rupert on 19 Feb 2020 16:43:47
Go to Top of Page

cpthero2
Great Reader

USA
2285 Posts

Posted - 19 Feb 2020 :  17:12:16  Show Profile  Visit cpthero2's Homepage Send cpthero2 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Master Rupert,

If you'd like me to stop talking about ethics as a moderator, I can do so. I didn't realize that was an off limits topic point. I find the reasons why individuals, groups, organizations, etc. do the things that they do, and to analyze that. It makes the Realms more real to me. However, if that is forbidden, I will certainly stop any such discussion.

Is there any play on discussing ethics, or is it completely off limits?

Best regards,




quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

Can we stop with the ethical commentary? We don't know the circumstances of the cleansing of that one community -- for all we know, the people in this community were committing crimes against nature and thus prompted the Enclave to act. Or maybe it was just one or two members of the Enclave, in an unsanctioned act for which they were later punished.

We don't have enough information to judge, and even if we did, a single isolated action does not prove "they delight in murdering entire towns" or are "unbelievably bad."

This whole thing of "one single questionable thing about which we have limited information, taken in isolation and ignoring all other information, equals thorough and unrepentant evil!" is getting really old.


Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring
Go to Top of Page

Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
Moderator

USA
36784 Posts

Posted - 19 Feb 2020 :  19:25:22  Show Profile Send Wooly Rupert a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by cpthero2

Master Rupert,

If you'd like me to stop talking about ethics as a moderator, I can do so. I didn't realize that was an off limits topic point. I find the reasons why individuals, groups, organizations, etc. do the things that they do, and to analyze that. It makes the Realms more real to me. However, if that is forbidden, I will certainly stop any such discussion.

Is there any play on discussing ethics, or is it completely off limits?



I'm not saying you can't discuss ethics. I'm saying to stop saying "all published lore about the alignment or goals of this person or group is wrong because of one incident." You are ignoring all existing lore to focus on one thing, judging the person or group based on this one thing, and then pronouncing your judgement as if it was an incontrovertible fact.

Being judgmental is NOT discussing ethics.

In this discussion, you've said an entire group happily embraces mass murder, based on one thing that we don't have any information about.

If you'd said "everything says they're neutral, but this may not be the entire story, because they did this thing over here" -- then that would have been one thing.

Instead, you said "they delight in murdering entire towns" -- something not backed up by any lore.

We know of a single community they removed. We don't know how big that community was. We don't know why that community was targeted. We don't know if the group as a whole decided to act, or if it was a single faction within the group, or if it was a handful of lone individuals who didn't consult with their superiors. We don't know the internal aftermath of that action -- was it considered a rogue action, and the perpetrators killed? Were they lauded for their action? Were they shuffled off to some patch of distant wilderness to atone? Did the perpetrators consider their action a regretful but necessary thing? Was it all a misunderstanding turned fatal?

We have zero information on which to make a judgement. Nothing at all. And yet you have not only decided that this was a wanton act of slaughter, you've also decided that the entire group embraces such things and enjoys them.

And even if it was a massacre called for by the group's leadership, why is everything else the group did before or after that being utterly dismissed?

As I have commented before, you're seeing a single small grey spot on a white canvas and declaring the entire thing to be black.

I am happy to discuss Realmslore, as long as we're discussing actual lore. You want to discuss whether or not a particular action was ethical? Hey, that's fine -- just stop with being so harshly judgmental of any perceived infraction.

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!

Edited by - Wooly Rupert on 19 Feb 2020 19:26:20
Go to Top of Page

cpthero2
Great Reader

USA
2285 Posts

Posted - 19 Feb 2020 :  20:29:51  Show Profile  Visit cpthero2's Homepage Send cpthero2 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Master Rupert,

Thank you for your reply. I appreciate that discourse.

quote:
You are ignoring all existing lore to focus on one thing, judging the person or group based on this one thing, and then pronouncing your judgement as if it was an incontrovertible fact.


I can certainly appreciate that it may appear that way. However, I am implicitly including elements of lore into my assessment of a group, in this case, the Emerald Enclave. It is known that if those who utilize The Power, i.e. Druids, go against the wishes, ethos, etc. of their Deity, they lose access to that Power. Knowing that that is the case, deductively indicates that Silvanus (or other deities that may have been furnishing spells to those Druids, since I don't know the make up of those Druids that "cleansed" the town) doesn't disapprove at least of such actions enough to take away their spellcasting powers. I would argue a lot of people a) would agree that that is a strong indicator by which to make a judgement (this is just evidence to corroborate a point) upon Silvanus' outlook, and b) enough evidence to presuppose that that organization, though while not murdering all of the time, at least does take such actions. The very quote from the Vilhon Reach said horrific actions, followed by cleansing of a startup community.

I am not certain if you are asking me to have incontrovertible facts on a subject so that it may be 100% proved before I make a comment, but knowing how Realms lore is never truly, fully complete, it by its very nature would mean making an ethical comment, or even perhaps a judgement would precluded, predicated on an inability to have 100%, incontrovertible evidence. If the judgement of character's portrayed character, nature, ethos, outlook, values, principles, etc. is the point of frustration, I can appreciate and respect that. I just feel it would be a good thing to include in the Code of Conduct.

I appreciate that I may have an interest in ethics, and evaluating characters I enjoy quite a lot, i.e. The Blackstaff, Elminster, Sammaster, Szass Tam, that many do not, but I enjoy elaborating on that element of my favorite character, and of course, my favorite setting.

quote:
Being judgmental is NOT discussing ethics.


You are 100% correct. I agree with you. The tool to make informed decisions on values based issues, are ethical models though. A disagreement with that outlook doesn't make it any less true. I think the fact that philosophy, and its sub-disciplines that have withstood thousands of years of rigorous academic scrutiny would uphold that fact. So, my judgments, and I agree they are, come from the application of applying scrutiny with tools that are meant to be used to evaluate (or judge) actions taken by people, or in this case, characters.

If for example you evaluated that my assessment was incorrect, not based on opinion, but demonstration that my understanding of lets say Nichomachean ethics was off and judged my analysis to be incorrect, that would be a legitimate (at least, academically legitimate) deconstruction of my argument. If it were valid, I would sensibly acknowledge as much, thank you for the correction, and thereby have taken a fantastic lesson that helps me better understand the situation, and perhaps that character, more.

quote:
Instead, you said "they delight in murdering entire towns" -- something not backed up by any lore.


If the umbrage taken with this quote of mine is the verb, delight, then I can certainly, and happily elucidate on that. I didn't randomly assume that such an action was "delight"ful by the Emerald Enclave. I predicated that assessment upon the Theory of Moral Sentiments, a wonderful book written by Adam Smith. The theory as I used it to evaluate the actions of the Emerald Enclave when they "cleansed" the start up community was to say that if we assume people's morals are "baked" into a person if you will, but the rules of society define action(s) as "bad" or "evil", then we can see that that opposite actions taken by a person(s) that opposed said society defined rules/laws, regardless of their own morals, is in fact, wrong. We see this stuff all the time when a judge, passes sentences upon people. They will call out, they will judge, people for their wrong behavior. They will proclaim upon them, their badness, in other words.

I'm only calling it as I see it, but am very open to being proven wrong, and in fact, would welcome it and thank someone for that correction. I seek to learn, and love to do so through my favorite campaign setting, a great deal.
_______________________

quote:
We know of a single community they removed. We don't know how big that community was. We don't know why that community was targeted. We don't know if the group as a whole decided to act, or if it was a single faction within the group, or if it was a handful of lone individuals who didn't consult with their superiors. We don't know the internal aftermath of that action -- was it considered a rogue action, and the perpetrators killed? Were they lauded for their action? Were they shuffled off to some patch of distant wilderness to atone? Did the perpetrators consider their action a regretful but necessary thing? Was it all a misunderstanding turned fatal?


I find this a fantastic part of your reply. Truly! This is a great opportunity to dig into this and try to interpret why it happened, when we have little information. In fact, something you mentioned before regarding a lack, or dearth, of information seemed to imply that unless we have all of that information we shouldn't pass judgement. The problem though as I mentioned is that with Realms lore, we often never get the full picture, and often never will. This seems to be design, and the idea is for everyone else to try and come to our own conclusion, which is what I am trying to muddle through on.

As to a single community being "removed", this is the kind of thing that I think is important in discussions. Removed has a connotation of just going away. That's completely antithetical to what the quote from canon lore said. You're simply not doing it justice. You're changing words, and by doing so, you are obfuscating what the author said, whether you desire to do so.

Definition of 'Removed': take (something) away or off from the position occupied
Definition of 'Cleansed': rid (a person, place, or thing) of something seen as unpleasant, unwanted, or defiling.
**Point of note on the definition of cleansed when you look it up and see two other definitions for it which I include here for posterity below: one can easily look at the quote from the Vilhon Reach accessory and take from several words earlier the snippet, "horrific actions" and get why 'cleansed' was utilized.
- Cleansed alternate definition: make (something, especially the skin) thoroughly clean.
- Cleansed alternate definition: free (someone) from sin or guilt.

Neither of those alternate definitions appeared in an way to be associated with "horrific actions", but the first one I posted, does.

As to your point about us not knowing "why that community was targeted", you are somewhat correct. We can look at the goals and objectives of the group and ascertain that they take such actions when they determine said action is correct. If the Emerald Enclave felt that the crimes were so heinous that the startup community were committing, how come they didn't go to the plutocratic government of Chondath and seek redress? They took extra judicial measures, on their own accord and passed judgement to the tune of "cleansing" a startup community.

The irony is that perhaps they startup community had it coming. Perhaps the government of Chondath would have themselves "removed" the Chondalwood of said startup community. However, looking at what the Emerald Enclave did through the lens of a Tyrran judge, a Tormtar, or compassionate Ilmatarian priest, I think to myself....I bet they don't agree with the Emerald Enclave. I bet that Tyrran judge is judging them.

Your other questions are as well stated questions, and I have to ask your view point on it, because they are great questions:

1) Do you think it was the whole group, a single faction within the group, or some other sized element of the group?
2) Do you think it was a rogue action based on the Enclaves totality of actions taken throughout history?
3) If it was, do you think that the Enclave would go and kill those individuals?
4) Do you think they were lauded for their actions?
5) Did atonement, assuming they were found to be wrong, happen, would it be required to happen with the Enclave?
_______________________


I think if you go back Master Rupert, and find my posts from even a few years ago regarding the subject of ethics, you'll find that I've been consistent. I am certainly dedicated to my outlooks, I deny that not. I however, hope that my desire to consider things through an ethical lens of my experiences and education does not come across as anything other than how I mean it: a zeal for the application of an interesting discipline to my most favorite and amazing campaign setting. I mean no frustration, I mean no ill will.

It appears that we are at a loggerhead with what is deemed subjective, and possibly therefore without merit or value, and what is deemed subjective with the ability to objectively analyze and come to reasonable beliefs about something.

I have to admit that if my utility of tried, true and millennia old philosophical theories from the greatest minds of the world are considered subjective on their face, as the implication seems, I would constantly find myself in a situation whereas the door would likely be consistently shut in my face for desire of discourse, and offerings of a different view point.

Surely, there must be some way we can come to a even-handed, sensible, open-minded solution to this problem. I seek that with you Master Rupert. As I am at the whim of moderation, I await your response and hope it fair.

Best regards as always, and thank you for your thoughtful reply to me!






quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

quote:
Originally posted by cpthero2

Master Rupert,

If you'd like me to stop talking about ethics as a moderator, I can do so. I didn't realize that was an off limits topic point. I find the reasons why individuals, groups, organizations, etc. do the things that they do, and to analyze that. It makes the Realms more real to me. However, if that is forbidden, I will certainly stop any such discussion.

Is there any play on discussing ethics, or is it completely off limits?



I'm not saying you can't discuss ethics. I'm saying to stop saying "all published lore about the alignment or goals of this person or group is wrong because of one incident." You are ignoring all existing lore to focus on one thing, judging the person or group based on this one thing, and then pronouncing your judgement as if it was an incontrovertible fact.

Being judgmental is NOT discussing ethics.

In this discussion, you've said an entire group happily embraces mass murder, based on one thing that we don't have any information about.

If you'd said "everything says they're neutral, but this may not be the entire story, because they did this thing over here" -- then that would have been one thing.

Instead, you said "they delight in murdering entire towns" -- something not backed up by any lore.

We know of a single community they removed. We don't know how big that community was. We don't know why that community was targeted. We don't know if the group as a whole decided to act, or if it was a single faction within the group, or if it was a handful of lone individuals who didn't consult with their superiors. We don't know the internal aftermath of that action -- was it considered a rogue action, and the perpetrators killed? Were they lauded for their action? Were they shuffled off to some patch of distant wilderness to atone? Did the perpetrators consider their action a regretful but necessary thing? Was it all a misunderstanding turned fatal?

We have zero information on which to make a judgement. Nothing at all. And yet you have not only decided that this was a wanton act of slaughter, you've also decided that the entire group embraces such things and enjoys them.

And even if it was a massacre called for by the group's leadership, why is everything else the group did before or after that being utterly dismissed?

As I have commented before, you're seeing a single small grey spot on a white canvas and declaring the entire thing to be black.

I am happy to discuss Realmslore, as long as we're discussing actual lore. You want to discuss whether or not a particular action was ethical? Hey, that's fine -- just stop with being so harshly judgmental of any perceived infraction.



Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring
Go to Top of Page

Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
Moderator

USA
36784 Posts

Posted - 19 Feb 2020 :  21:47:05  Show Profile Send Wooly Rupert a Private Message  Reply with Quote
A sensible, open-minded solution is to not be so close-minded as to say one questionable action taken without any context or further information about that action throws everything else out the window.

Let's flip this around: if someone murders multiple people, over the course of several years -- but one day stops and helps a little old lady cross the street -- then is this person good or evil? Looking at the whole of this person's actions, they are evil.

But these examples -- the Emerald Enclave cleansing a community, Khelben Arunsun handing an artifact to a bad guy -- in these examples, what you're doing is saying "Hey, look, this guy helped a little old lady cross the street. This is a good action, therefore, this is a good person."

That's my complaint: You're taking one individual thing and basing your opinion on that, ignoring everything else, and calling it a discussion. You're pronouncing judgement while ignoring everything that doesn't support that judgement. You don't seem willing to consider that there could be any justification for the actions, it's one strike and they're out.

One community, cleansed for unknown reasons, and the entire group is a bunch of murderers.

One action, taken in support of the greater good and having an immediate benefit to a region where hundreds of thousands of people live, and because someone else did something, the first guy is a psychopath.

You are not discussing ethics when you do this. You are passing judgement and stating it as fact.

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!
Go to Top of Page

cpthero2
Great Reader

USA
2285 Posts

Posted - 20 Feb 2020 :  16:14:06  Show Profile  Visit cpthero2's Homepage Send cpthero2 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Master Rupert,

As always, I appreciate the thoughtful response.

quote:
A sensible, open-minded solution is to not be so close-minded as to say one questionable action taken without any context or further information about that action throws everything else out the window.


So I will be considered open-minded if and only if I meet one or both of the two offered premises which are: a)taking things out of context or b) not utilizing other information. This is by the exact definition, a teleological outlook. I'm not saying it is evil in all circumstances, unless I am looking at it through a deontological lens, as you will note in the several various scrolls we've debated in. I could just as easily switch to viewing the actions of the Enclave through another ethical lens, but I am choosing to evaluate the actions through a deontological lens. That is all I am saying.

Here is the definition I am using for a teleological perspective so that you can understand why I am labeling your argument the way I am:

Consequentialist ethics come from the teleological branch of ethical theory. You will remember that teleological theories focus on the goal of the ethical action.(SOAS London UK, https://www.soas.ac.uk/cedep-demos/000_P563_EED_K3736-Demo/unit1/page_17.htm)

Consequentialism is based on two principles:

Whether an act is right or wrong depends only on the results of that act
The more good consequences an act produces, the better or more right that act

Bear in mind that doesn't talk about what happened during the course of achieving those consequence. Only the consequences themselves are focused on. The ends justify the means is what that means.

Pushing the notion that a hasty generalization on my part has been made is not necessarily a bad argument for a presented fallacy. However, the flaw with that is, you know that there is no more information about that, other than what the author wrote, and that is all I can go off (in terms of that one incident). Just because the volume of information you desire is not present, does not a case for exoneration it make. Sometimes decisions are made when people do not have all of the information they would like, but they desire to make the most informed decision with the evidence at hand, and do.

Though, I've debated with you in several different scrolls with more evidence about the Emerald Enclave than what I specifically presented here, it may have been forgotten (as we've debated a lot) so I will again provide that identified set of events that the Emerald Enclave has committed that identify, through a deontological lens, that they are evil.

  • "It is widely held by the Harpers that the intention of the druids is to hold the Reach under one central authority, thereby making it easier to establish their political dominance of the area."(Vilhon Reach, p.14)White not capital crimes by any stretch, it goes to show they want to dominate areas politically: not exactly good in most people's book.
  • "Silvanus is also the patron of the Emerald Enclave, the band of druids that seeks to keep the entire Vilhon Reach area ecologically sound. That group's violence and ruthlessness are as legendary as the plagues that swept through the Vilhon."(Vilhon Reach, p.17)Legendary violence and ruthlessness is definitely enough. However, let's get more. Since there is more "context" to go.
  • "And, of course, the Emerald Enclave continued its militant activities in an effort to protect the interests of Silvanus."(Vilhon Reach, p.10)More legendary and ruthless violence continued in its military activities: check. There is yet more "context."
  • "While the church has been accused of horrific actions (such as the "cleansing" of a startup community in Chondalwood in 1362, which was actually performed by the Emerald Enclave), they are guilty of some horrific actions of their own."(Vilhon Reach, p.17)We've already established by your proclamation that "cleansing" a community could have been justified, so let's seek out more "context."
  • "Most travelers are familiar with Mount Kolimnis, called Eversmoke due to its volcanic activity. The city of Gildenglade is even more familiar with the volcano. Ten years ago, the city was concerned that Eversmoke might eventually erupt and destroy their town. With that in mind, they hired a wizard to research a spell that would silence the volcano forever. Danirro of Alaghôn stepped forward to conquer the mountain. For two years, Danirro researched a spell that would silence the volcano. On a hot summer day in 1360, he climbed up to the lip of Mt. Kolimnus and began casting his spell. Whether or not he would have been successful will never be known. Agents of the Emerald Enclave shapeshifted on either side of him and pushed the spellcasting mage into the heart of the volcano. Danirro's ring of feather fall was said to activate, but it only served to offer him a slow death as he floated slowly down into the magma."(Vilhon Reach, p.40)Nicely done Emerald Enclave! The guy just wanted to help save his entire civilization from an active volcano. Instead he gets to die, but not just any old regular death. He got to die slowly, in a magma pit, by intentional first degree murder! Now, I know what you might be thinking here: what if that is just not enough context?


Let's take a look at that context now. I want to briefly go back to the plague part. I know, you may be thinking: it was probably just a few people that died. Well, the quote above did say "...as legendary as the plagues..." As in, more than one plague.

quote:
In the Year of the Clinging Death (75 DR), a plague tore through the Vilhon Reach, killing more than 50% of the total population in as little as 10 years.


To begin with: I am not saying that the Emerald Enclave started this plague.

However, let's hold on a darn tootin' moment here! I thought it was just said that "That group's violence and ruthlessness are as legendary as the plagues that swept through the Vilhon."? So, if I understand this correctly, their violence was so ruthless and legendary, that it was equal to half the loss of the regions humans in 10 years? Let's take a look at that population shall we? (https://www.realmshelps.net/faerun/vilhon.shtml)

In 1372, the Vilhon Reach had a population of approximately 5,705,840 (humans 95%, dwarves 2%, elves 1%, lizard-folk 1%). Let's just for arguments sakes reduce that by 75% to 1,426,420. Now, that is of course silly to do so, but let's see what 50% of that is...oh my, it appears to be 713,230. Being generous I reduced that to an absurdly low number whereas the high value would be 2,852,920. So, the Emerald Enclaves violence is so legendary and ruthless that it is stated to be on par with a death toll of between 713k to 2.8 million? Indeed. That is in fact what the citations say.

Anyways...........

As always, I await your response, and thank you for the spirited debate! :)

Best regards,






quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

A sensible, open-minded solution is to not be so close-minded as to say one questionable action taken without any context or further information about that action throws everything else out the window.

Let's flip this around: if someone murders multiple people, over the course of several years -- but one day stops and helps a little old lady cross the street -- then is this person good or evil? Looking at the whole of this person's actions, they are evil.

But these examples -- the Emerald Enclave cleansing a community, Khelben Arunsun handing an artifact to a bad guy -- in these examples, what you're doing is saying "Hey, look, this guy helped a little old lady cross the street. This is a good action, therefore, this is a good person."

That's my complaint: You're taking one individual thing and basing your opinion on that, ignoring everything else, and calling it a discussion. You're pronouncing judgement while ignoring everything that doesn't support that judgement. You don't seem willing to consider that there could be any justification for the actions, it's one strike and they're out.

One community, cleansed for unknown reasons, and the entire group is a bunch of murderers.

One action, taken in support of the greater good and having an immediate benefit to a region where hundreds of thousands of people live, and because someone else did something, the first guy is a psychopath.

You are not discussing ethics when you do this. You are passing judgement and stating it as fact.


Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring

Edited by - cpthero2 on 20 Feb 2020 16:17:40
Go to Top of Page

Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
Moderator

USA
36784 Posts

Posted - 20 Feb 2020 :  16:43:35  Show Profile Send Wooly Rupert a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by cpthero2


So I will be considered open-minded if and only if I meet one or both of the two offered premises which are: a)taking things out of context or b) not utilizing other information.



What you are doing is taking things out of context and not utilizing other info. It is not being open-minded when you refuse to consider all relevant info.

You cited one single data point. One. And it's a data point for which you have absolutely no context at all. And from that one single data point, ignoring ALL other information, you stated "they delight in murdering entire towns".

I'm not an ethics junkie. I don't know teleological from deontological from technological.

What I do know is that pronouncing judgement based on one single fact and ignoring all other information is wrong.

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!

Edited by - Wooly Rupert on 20 Feb 2020 17:00:18
Go to Top of Page

cpthero2
Great Reader

USA
2285 Posts

Posted - 20 Feb 2020 :  17:53:39  Show Profile  Visit cpthero2's Homepage Send cpthero2 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Master Rupert,

quote:
What you are doing is taking things out of context and not utilizing other info.


One of two things is at play with your cited quote above: a) you literally do not believe that multiple instances, described by the author count as utilizing other info and therefore, because there are not other separate sources on the matter a determination cannot be rendered, or b) you find the author's writings to be invalid. Let's take a look at those:

a) You've provided an opinion that you feel that one source is not valid enough, according to my indication in point (a) above. That is literally nonsensical. Just because only one text has been written that encapsulates the crimes of the Emerald Enclave, does not invalidate it. Though, I am always open to being corrected. Master Rupert, what are you relying on, other than personal opinion, that articulately describes a necessary mandate that more than one source is needed?

b) Well, if you don't take stock in author Jim Butler's writings that is of course your call. However, I am quoting him chapter and verse what he said, and it appears it is only your opinion that contravenes his canon.

quote:
It is not being open-minded when you refuse to consider all relevant info.


When I see that a "group's violence and ruthlessness are as legendary as the plagues that swept through the Vilhon", and that I can quantify the cost of those plagues (remember, multiples plagues) in death toll between 713k and 2.8 million people, I and most people consider that to be mass murder on a prolific scale.

You can window dress that all you like by stating, that I "refuse to consider all relevant info." Master Rupert, I've been waiting over multiple scrolls for you to provide this vaunted "other info", yet all I ever see is opinionated disagreement.

Perhaps, you could attack the argument with data, as opposed to amorphous ideas and notions that carry no sensible weight? I would recommend that. I've provided data, and qualified analysis. Something you have woefully been lacking in throughout every argument you have presented. Your entitled to that, but it is by no means convincing to the academic or the lay person.

quote:
You cited one single data point. One. And it's a data point for which you have absolutely no context at all. And from that one single data point, ignoring ALL other information, you stated "they delight in murdering entire towns".


You are comingling two separate examples I gave in the bullet points below.

1) The cleansing of the town by the Enclave, with...
2) The additional actions taken by the Enclave that over the years have led to between 713k and 2.8 million people dying due to their legendarily ruthless violence.

So, even if you discount the "cleansing" of that startup community, you are still faced with the facts that as author Jim Butler placed into the boxed set: the Enclaves legendary and ruthless violence was commensurate with the plagues that swept through the region. Those plagues at least led to between 713k and 2.8 million deaths. At least. He's saying that is how violent they are, that they have themselves led to that many deaths. It's in the words. The words say it. Just read the words.

As to the huge amount of deaths, are you asking for context in the killing of between 713k and 2.8 million people? I mean this with all sincerity Master Rupert: I am beside myself with disbelief. I don't consider 713k to 2.8 million people a data point. Those are lives that were taken by a legendarily ruthless organization. What possible excuse or justification could they have in taking that many lives? Killing 50% of a population is somehow justifiable? I have to admit, I've never been faced with such an argument. Please articulate that justification. I am all ears.

Though this is in a fantasy setting, I don't discount the horror that is being described by way of the author, about the Emerald Enclave. That's one of the points of writings: to as a human, sympathize or empathize with what is being described.

quote:
I'm not an ethics junkie. I don't know teleological from deontological from technological.


Fair enough. I certainly don't have an expectation that you do. However, I am using argumentative models to evaluate information to make an informed decision. I feel using those models, as has been done for thousands of years, is a reasonable approach.

quote:
What I do know is that pronouncing judgement based on one single fact and ignoring all other information is wrong.


A couple of things wrong here:

1) It is not a single fact. Please do not misrepresent my argument, which is what has happened, whether intentional or not. I included five individual facts in the bullet points below that articulate my argument. Please do not misrepresent that. It is disingenuous and not appreciated.

2) "Ignoring all other information is wrong." This again is misrepresenting my argument. I've presented five, credible, and substantial facts. You have countered with your belief that I am wrong, but have never countered with a single fact about the Emerald Enclave.

The only reason that comes to mind regarding good acts taken by the Emerald Enclave (and I admit, they have surely done good things, I do not deny this) is that if and when you identify those actions and place them in a list to be evaluated, you will be comparing the incomparable.

You will be comparing a list of actions against a substantiated, verified death toll of between 713k and 2.8 million people. Let's admit it now too: those better be some really amazing good deeds done by the Emerald Enclave if you are going to validate that many deaths by some good deeds.

As always, I appreciate the spirited and ongoing debate, and await your reply.

Thank you Master Rupert.

Best regards,






quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

quote:
Originally posted by cpthero2


So I will be considered open-minded if and only if I meet one or both of the two offered premises which are: a)taking things out of context or b) not utilizing other information.



What you are doing is taking things out of context and not utilizing other info. It is not being open-minded when you refuse to consider all relevant info.

You cited one single data point. One. And it's a data point for which you have absolutely no context at all. And from that one single data point, ignoring ALL other information, you stated "they delight in murdering entire towns".

I'm not an ethics junkie. I don't know teleological from deontological from technological.

What I do know is that pronouncing judgement based on one single fact and ignoring all other information is wrong.



Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring
Go to Top of Page

Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
Moderator

USA
36784 Posts

Posted - 20 Feb 2020 :  21:45:44  Show Profile Send Wooly Rupert a Private Message  Reply with Quote
No, the post that I'm complaining about -- the one stamped 19 Feb 2020 : 15:50:24 -- included one fact and one fact only -- that a community had been cleansed. And from this fact, you stated "they delight in murdering entire towns".

And in response to my complaints, you're adding things that weren't included in your first post, and making assumptions based on connections you yourself state are not there.

You want to convince me that an organization that is canonically described as being neutral is actually a bunch of gleeful murderers? Show it to me. Don't rely on single facts and assumptions -- give me explicit canon references.

Otherwise, I'm done. We've gone horribly far from the topic in an old discussion that was clearly no longer of interest to anyone, given 15 years of inactivity, and we're arguing facts versus assumptions and opinions.

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!
Go to Top of Page

cpthero2
Great Reader

USA
2285 Posts

Posted - 21 Feb 2020 :  02:34:50  Show Profile  Visit cpthero2's Homepage Send cpthero2 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Master Rupert,

Thank you for your reply, as always. :)

quote:
No, the post that I'm complaining about -- the one stamped 19 Feb 2020 : 15:50:24 -- included one fact and one fact only -- that a community had been cleansed. And from this fact, you stated "they delight in murdering entire towns".


I have erroneously assigned credit where credit was not due. I assumed you would remember related points from (2) and (7) days before, from two separate scrolls: the Rilmani and Nystul's Nullifier scrolls, respectively. Since you have not referenced them, I will remind you of them below, as it relates to your claims of my not having submitted additional information.

Here are the timestamps here for you:

  • Nystul's Nullifier: 13 Feb 20 @ 02:51:55
  • Rilmani: 18 Feb 20 @ 21:26:38


However, the fact that I still had posted additional information in the other scrolls, invalidates your point regarding additional information. I'll address the "delight" part below.

My assessment of an enclave of Druid's wiping out a startup community of people that was identified as having committed a horrific action in the same sentence by the canon author, means to me that they relished that action to some degree, for whatever reason motivated them to do it in the first place. They were not robots. They had emotions, and yet they visited the most final act of violence upon an entire startup community, ending in it being "cleansed." Argue what you want about that word, but the connotation is made and accepted. You choosing not to accept it is your choice, but in no way makes it correct because either the nuanced connotation escapes you or you choose not to accept it.

As we have continued to debate, we have arrived at this seeming finale. In this scroll, I completed the argument with a damning onslaught of overwhelming evidence, confirming that in fact what I said was true, then and now: the Emerald Enclave in justifying its actions through a teleological outlook, confirms it is an evil organization when viewed through a deontological lens. As I've stated countless times, you're entitled to your opinion, but not the facts. Justification has its own ethic: it's called consequentialism.

As a matter of a well described and fantastic fantasy group, i.e. the Emerald Enclave, that is its own unique group in the Realms, I feel they are great, even though they are evil. There are plenty of amazing groups that are evil. However, just because somebody chose to not study philosophy a little bit or more, at university or apart from it, does not make their proclamations about ethics any more valid. That is absurd. The tree does makes noise in the forest after it falls, even when someone is not around to hear it.

quote:
You want to convince me that an organization that is canonically described as being neutral is actually a bunch of gleeful murderers? Show it to me. Don't rely on single facts and assumptions -- give me explicit canon references.


In this debate, you intentionally or otherwise, overstate my need to convince you. I make these arguments to the community at large, which of course includes you. You may be the focus of the debate but not a source of need for affirmation: my self-esteem is quite well intact. My arguments against your points are to lay low those counterarguments which are not well reasoned, or insufficient in their contribution to the assessment I brought to facets of the Realms.

When I confirm with canonical facts, as I laid out in the five bullet points in this scroll, that the Emerald Enclave is responsible for legendarily ruthless violence that has led to somewhere between 713k and 2.8 million people dead due to them, and you don't consider that valid even though it comes from canon, then you're choosing to disregard it. Those are rationally derived, quantified facts. I've provided the incontrovertible evidence, yet you persist in your belief that I may perhaps need to find a sentence or more from some Forgotten Realms authority that says something to the effect of:

"The Emerald Enclave is evil. They killed 1.2 million people and relished every moment of it like a child relishes eating ice cream", signed, Forgotten Realms author.

As an example, with something terrible like murders, most people desire that clear, concise, admission of guilt that stipulates to every facet of the crime so that when that person goes before the judge, the situation is so perfect, that justice is inescapable. Unfortunately, that's just not how life always, or even regularly, works out. Sometimes, as much as we desire it, we don't get things the way we want them, and we have to extrapolate from other information what happened. The information I provided is solid. It withstands scrutiny. It withstands scrutiny so well, that you have not once cited canonical sources yourself to the contrary of my argument, but rather, only ever offered unfounded opinions. Referencing back to subjective versus objective: your repeated opinions are why philosophers in fact do mandate the use of highly structured arguments and logic.

As to someone declaring to me that a group is neutral, I care not what the dictates of someone’s ethics and morals are by fiat. I will judge them based on what I observe, read, and analyze. I have a well-educated mind, a plethora of relevant life experiences, and am a person who can reason through complex issues. I do not accept that someone will define for me the mandates of right and wrong. Instead, I will use the tools I possess to debate the issue intellectually. I accept outcomes that are sensible as mandated by rational thought and logic. I do not accept the whimsical entreaties of those who, with intent or otherwise, undermine the diligent and magnanimous work of those great minds who have allowed people to argue and debate in a way that solves problems more than causes them.

I do accept your assertion that this be a point where we can call this as final in this scroll. Though we clearly will to do as we have done in the past and agree to disagree that we’re arguing facts versus assumptions and opinions. I stand by my arguments, know they withstand scrutiny, and have defeated your counterarguments.

My only question, which is one of a few different elements that have led to this protracted discussion is:

As the chief moderator, are my desires to engage in discourse, make statements/comments, etc. allowed within the vein of philosophy, ethics, etc. as I have engaged in them thus far?

As always, though our debates can involve powerful beliefs and outlooks, I mean them in a purely intellectual manner. I harbor no animus towards you. I wanted to make that abundantly clear.

I very much appreciate your zeal and commitment to Candlekeep, and these fantastic Realms that we clearly both have a great deal of love and affection for.

Best regards,





quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

No, the post that I'm complaining about -- the one stamped 19 Feb 2020 : 15:50:24 -- included one fact and one fact only -- that a community had been cleansed. And from this fact, you stated "they delight in murdering entire towns".

And in response to my complaints, you're adding things that weren't included in your first post, and making assumptions based on connections you yourself state are not there.

You want to convince me that an organization that is canonically described as being neutral is actually a bunch of gleeful murderers? Show it to me. Don't rely on single facts and assumptions -- give me explicit canon references.

Otherwise, I'm done. We've gone horribly far from the topic in an old discussion that was clearly no longer of interest to anyone, given 15 years of inactivity, and we're arguing facts versus assumptions and opinions.


Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring
Go to Top of Page

Kentinal
Great Reader

4686 Posts

Posted - 21 Feb 2020 :  02:57:19  Show Profile Send Kentinal a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by cpthero2

Master Rupert,

Thank you for your reply, as always. :)

quote:
No, the post that I'm complaining about -- the one stamped 19 Feb 2020 : 15:50:24 -- included one fact and one fact only -- that a community had been cleansed. And from this fact, you stated "they delight in murdering entire towns".


I have erroneously assigned credit where credit was not due. I assumed you would remember related points from (2) and (7) days before, from two separate scrolls: the Rilmani and Nystul's Nullifier scrolls, respectively. Since you have not referenced them, I will remind you of them below, as it relates to your claims of my not having submitted additional information.



Considering how many posts you have been making it is unrealistic to expect even a Moderator to recall the content of all of them or to know that you include in your answer some context you recall writing in only two of them. It makes it much easier to follow a scroll when the information is in that scroll, not two others.

The discussion has gone far beyond the original topic and in some ways believe this scroll might be considered for lock or split.

The only thing I do wonder is if you believe always killing invaders an Evil act?

"Small beings can have small wisdom," the dragon said. "And small wise beings are better than small fools. Listen: Wisdom is caring for afterwards."
"Caring for afterwards ...? Ker repeated this without understanding.
"After action, afterwards," the dragon said. "Choose the afterwards first, then the action. Fools choose action first."
"Judgement" copyright 2003 by Elizabeth Moon
Go to Top of Page

cpthero2
Great Reader

USA
2285 Posts

Posted - 21 Feb 2020 :  03:00:39  Show Profile  Visit cpthero2's Homepage Send cpthero2 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Great Reader Kentinal,

I will create a separate topic for that, and I invite you to please come along for the discussion! :)

Thank you.

Best regards,




quote:
Originally posted by Kentinal

quote:
Originally posted by cpthero2

Master Rupert,

Thank you for your reply, as always. :)

quote:
No, the post that I'm complaining about -- the one stamped 19 Feb 2020 : 15:50:24 -- included one fact and one fact only -- that a community had been cleansed. And from this fact, you stated "they delight in murdering entire towns".


I have erroneously assigned credit where credit was not due. I assumed you would remember related points from (2) and (7) days before, from two separate scrolls: the Rilmani and Nystul's Nullifier scrolls, respectively. Since you have not referenced them, I will remind you of them below, as it relates to your claims of my not having submitted additional information.



Considering how many posts you have been making it is unrealistic to expect even a Moderator to recall the content of all of them or to know that you include in your answer some context you recall writing in only two of them. It makes it much easier to follow a scroll when the information is in that scroll, not two others.

The discussion has gone far beyond the original topic and in some ways believe this scroll might be considered for lock or split.

The only thing I do wonder is if you believe always killing invaders an Evil act?


Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring
Go to Top of Page

Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
Moderator

USA
36784 Posts

Posted - 21 Feb 2020 :  03:31:41  Show Profile Send Wooly Rupert a Private Message  Reply with Quote
cpthero2:

I am not the chief moderator. I am A moderator.

And me asking you to actually look at facts is not coming from a moderator. That's coming from a member of this forum. I'm here because I enjoy discussing Realmslore.

You say you've provided overwhelming evidence. I still see nothing but assumptions.

We don't know a thing about this cleansed community, but you assume they enjoyed doing it -- without any canon information that remotely implies that.

You're also laying millions of deaths at their feet, again based on your own assumption that being as well known as a plague means they caused the same number of deaths. You stated yourself that there was no proof the Enclave had anything to do with these plagues, and then use those same plagues to claim the Enclave is evil.

You want me or anyone else to believe your assertions, back them up with facts, not assumptions.

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!
Go to Top of Page

cpthero2
Great Reader

USA
2285 Posts

Posted - 21 Feb 2020 :  04:11:52  Show Profile  Visit cpthero2's Homepage Send cpthero2 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Master Rupert,

My apologies. I assumed by the sheer volume of posts that you were the chief moderator (heck, that is an impressive amount of posts!). I stand corrected. :)

As to you asking me to look at facts, etc., not coming from a moderator, I will say: thank you. I wasn't sure, but I appreciate you clarifying that. It is appreciated. :)

Well, as to the overwhelming evidence, my position is you just haven't read everything I posed to you. That's your prerogative, but doesn't make your claims, beliefs, or outlooks any more correct.

As to the cleansed community comment, again, this is simply denial of what is clear based on the (5) five bullets of information provided from canon sources, that are cited. You are as always, entitled to your beliefs, but evidence is an ugly maiden when she comes calling, and I think she may be at your door right now, knocking... I'll give you a minute.

Anyhow......

You are so very, very, absolutely correct about me laying millions of deaths at their feet. I've articulated my reasons. Again, you can deny them all you like. I think Neville Chamberlain did something like that back in the day. Could you ask him how those negotiations went? Well anyways........... moving right along..........

You 100% misrepresented my point when you said, "You stated yourself that there was no proof the Enclave had anything to do with these plagues..." What I quoted, then said, was...

Plague quote:

quote:
In the Year of the Clinging Death (75 DR), a plague tore through the Vilhon Reach, killing more than 50% of the total population in as little as 10 years.


My statement:

quote:
To begin with: I am not saying that the Emerald Enclave started this plague.

However, let's hold on a darn tootin' moment here! I thought it was just said that "That group's violence and ruthlessness are as legendary as the plagues that swept through the Vilhon."


What you might want to consider first is looking at the fact that the plague in 75DR was one of (you guessed it) all plagues in the region. The amalgamated plagues led to 'x' deaths. Knowing that canon stipulates that 50% of the entire Vilhon Reach was killed by plague alone in the Year of the Clinging Death, and that Jim Butler's entry identifies that the Emerald Enclaves legendarily ruthless violence was equal to the plagues of the region we can easily ascertain that we would include the plague that killed 50% of the entire population of the Vilhon Reach.

Again, repeating that they are assumptions does not make them that. I've provided the evidence. I stand by it. We can disagree, and that's fine. I feel confident in my research and conclusion.

The Emerald Enclave is adjudicated by me to be an evil organization.

Best regards,




quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

cpthero2:

I am not the chief moderator. I am A moderator.

And me asking you to actually look at facts is not coming from a moderator. That's coming from a member of this forum. I'm here because I enjoy discussing Realmslore.

You say you've provided overwhelming evidence. I still see nothing but assumptions.

We don't know a thing about this cleansed community, but you assume they enjoyed doing it -- without any canon information that remotely implies that.

You're also laying millions of deaths at their feet, again based on your own assumption that being as well known as a plague means they caused the same number of deaths. You stated yourself that there was no proof the Enclave had anything to do with these plagues, and then use those same plagues to claim the Enclave is evil.

You want me or anyone else to believe your assertions, back them up with facts, not assumptions.


Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring
Go to Top of Page

MrSukx
Acolyte

USA
5 Posts

Posted - 21 Feb 2020 :  04:33:56  Show Profile Send MrSukx a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Not trying to really get to involved into that debate too deeply, but based on reading all the posts it seems that cpthero2 has supplied information and sources to the claim that the Emerald enclave is known for being ruthless.
I cannot speak for the validity to the reference as I really do not know much on the topic, but if what was said is indeed accurate, which was never really challenged but rather dismissed without comment, then they would be responsible for massive murders/killings and the like. Seems like a reasonable conclusion at this point to say that they, in part or entirely, employ evil tactics to go about their ends.
I'm not saying that are evil or not, but rather based on my very limited information, they do not shy away from using evil tactics.

"When everyone lies, telling the truth isn't just rebellion. It's an act of revolution. So think carefully when you speak it, because the truth is a weapon."
~Takeshi Kovacs
Go to Top of Page

Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
Moderator

USA
36784 Posts

Posted - 21 Feb 2020 :  04:45:59  Show Profile Send Wooly Rupert a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by MrSukx

Not trying to really get to involved into that debate too deeply, but based on reading all the posts it seems that cpthero2 has supplied information and sources to the claim that the Emerald enclave is known for being ruthless.
I cannot speak for the validity to the reference as I really do not know much on the topic, but if what was said is indeed accurate, which was never really challenged but rather dismissed without comment, then they would be responsible for massive murders/killings and the like. Seems like a reasonable conclusion at this point to say that they, in part or entirely, employ evil tactics to go about their ends.
I'm not saying that are evil or not, but rather based on my very limited information, they do not shy away from using evil tactics.



I'm not arguing that they're not ruthless. I'm arguing that there is nothing saying they're the source of plagues. I'm arguing that there is nothing saying they are happy to commit mass murder.

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!
Go to Top of Page

Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
Moderator

USA
36784 Posts

Posted - 21 Feb 2020 :  04:48:41  Show Profile Send Wooly Rupert a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by cpthero2

Master Rupert,

My apologies. I assumed by the sheer volume of posts that you were the chief moderator (heck, that is an impressive amount of posts!). I stand corrected. :)

As to you asking me to look at facts, etc., not coming from a moderator, I will say: thank you. I wasn't sure, but I appreciate you clarifying that. It is appreciated. :)

Well, as to the overwhelming evidence, my position is you just haven't read everything I posed to you. That's your prerogative, but doesn't make your claims, beliefs, or outlooks any more correct.

As to the cleansed community comment, again, this is simply denial of what is clear based on the (5) five bullets of information provided from canon sources, that are cited. You are as always, entitled to your beliefs, but evidence is an ugly maiden when she comes calling, and I think she may be at your door right now, knocking... I'll give you a minute.

Anyhow......

You are so very, very, absolutely correct about me laying millions of deaths at their feet. I've articulated my reasons. Again, you can deny them all you like. I think Neville Chamberlain did something like that back in the day. Could you ask him how those negotiations went? Well anyways........... moving right along..........

You 100% misrepresented my point when you said, "You stated yourself that there was no proof the Enclave had anything to do with these plagues..." What I quoted, then said, was...

Plague quote:

quote:
In the Year of the Clinging Death (75 DR), a plague tore through the Vilhon Reach, killing more than 50% of the total population in as little as 10 years.


My statement:

quote:
To begin with: I am not saying that the Emerald Enclave started this plague.

However, let's hold on a darn tootin' moment here! I thought it was just said that "That group's violence and ruthlessness are as legendary as the plagues that swept through the Vilhon."


What you might want to consider first is looking at the fact that the plague in 75DR was one of (you guessed it) all plagues in the region. The amalgamated plagues led to 'x' deaths. Knowing that canon stipulates that 50% of the entire Vilhon Reach was killed by plague alone in the Year of the Clinging Death, and that Jim Butler's entry identifies that the Emerald Enclaves legendarily ruthless violence was equal to the plagues of the region we can easily ascertain that we would include the plague that killed 50% of the entire population of the Vilhon Reach.

Again, repeating that they are assumptions does not make them that. I've provided the evidence. I stand by it. We can disagree, and that's fine. I feel confident in my research and conclusion.

The Emerald Enclave is adjudicated by me to be an evil organization.

Best regards,




quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

cpthero2:

I am not the chief moderator. I am A moderator.

And me asking you to actually look at facts is not coming from a moderator. That's coming from a member of this forum. I'm here because I enjoy discussing Realmslore.

You say you've provided overwhelming evidence. I still see nothing but assumptions.

We don't know a thing about this cleansed community, but you assume they enjoyed doing it -- without any canon information that remotely implies that.

You're also laying millions of deaths at their feet, again based on your own assumption that being as well known as a plague means they caused the same number of deaths. You stated yourself that there was no proof the Enclave had anything to do with these plagues, and then use those same plagues to claim the Enclave is evil.

You want me or anyone else to believe your assertions, back them up with facts, not assumptions.





So you quote yourself in saying that they didn't start this plague, and then blame them for it anyway...

Give me a canon reference that explicitly says they started the plagues. Until you can provide that, you're operating on an assumption.

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!
Go to Top of Page

MrSukx
Acolyte

USA
5 Posts

Posted - 21 Feb 2020 :  04:51:20  Show Profile Send MrSukx a Private Message  Reply with Quote
It was never stated that they were the source of the plague. It was clearly stated that they were not, but rather they were are deadly/ruthless as the plague/s.
If I knew how to quote here I would quote cpthero2 in his post where it was stated.
If they enjoyed the bloodshed or not, I cannot speak on, sadly.
Give me a few months and I should be more versed on the subject, as well as others.

Thank you for your reply Wooly Rupert.

"When everyone lies, telling the truth isn't just rebellion. It's an act of revolution. So think carefully when you speak it, because the truth is a weapon."
~Takeshi Kovacs
Go to Top of Page

cpthero2
Great Reader

USA
2285 Posts

Posted - 21 Feb 2020 :  04:57:09  Show Profile  Visit cpthero2's Homepage Send cpthero2 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Acolyte MrSukx,

Well stated sir.

Best regards,



quote:
Originally posted by MrSukx

It was never stated that they were the source of the plague. It was clearly stated that they were not, but rather they were are deadly/ruthless as the plague/s.
If I knew how to quote here I would quote cpthero2 in his post where it was stated.
If they enjoyed the bloodshed or not, I cannot speak on, sadly.
Give me a few months and I should be more versed on the subject, as well as others.

Thank you for your reply Wooly Rupert.


Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring
Go to Top of Page

perlmugp
Seeker

USA
69 Posts

Posted - 21 Feb 2020 :  05:04:16  Show Profile  Visit perlmugp's Homepage Send perlmugp a Private Message  Reply with Quote
This is the strangest fight scene I have ever watched.

--Zoomable Map of Faerun--
Go to Top of Page

cpthero2
Great Reader

USA
2285 Posts

Posted - 21 Feb 2020 :  05:16:35  Show Profile  Visit cpthero2's Homepage Send cpthero2 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Seeker perlmugp,

You know, I can certainly appreciate that.

It started out as commentary on still born babies, the fugue plane, the ethics of it all, and then it kind of got heavy.

What are your thoughts Seeker perlmugp, beyond the already stated by you? :)

Best regards,




quote:
Originally posted by perlmugp

This is the strangest fight scene I have ever watched.


Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring
Go to Top of Page

Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
Moderator

USA
36784 Posts

Posted - 21 Feb 2020 :  05:39:32  Show Profile Send Wooly Rupert a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by MrSukx

It was never stated that they were the source of the plague. It was clearly stated that they were not, but rather they were are deadly/ruthless as the plague/s.
If I knew how to quote here I would quote cpthero2 in his post where it was stated.
If they enjoyed the bloodshed or not, I cannot speak on, sadly.
Give me a few months and I should be more versed on the subject, as well as others.

Thank you for your reply Wooly Rupert.



Okay, I stand corrected. He did not say they started the plagues. I will concede that point.

But he does say that their reputation for ruthlessness means they've caused just as many deaths. It is not backed up in canon that they've caused any large number of deaths -- ruthlessness can include violence that stops well short of fatalities.

And X being just as well-known as Y does not mean there is any similarity between the two. In the Dales, Storm Silverhand is just as well-known as Manshoon -- does that mean that both are beautiful bards, or that both are tyrannical villains?

I'm not proclaiming someone to be a villain without facts -- and certainly not when canon states otherwise.

We know of exactly one time that someone died at Enclave hands, but cpthero is making assumptions to blame them for millions of deaths, and he's assuming that they delight in these deaths.

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!
Go to Top of Page

MrSukx
Acolyte

USA
5 Posts

Posted - 21 Feb 2020 :  05:54:15  Show Profile Send MrSukx a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Wooly Rupert,
I cannot say one way or the other one how canonical it is or isn't. I'm just learning about most of this stuff to be honest. I'm in the process of the deepplunge into the lore. There really is an amazing amount of lore here at Candlekeep!

Thanks for the reply

"When everyone lies, telling the truth isn't just rebellion. It's an act of revolution. So think carefully when you speak it, because the truth is a weapon."
~Takeshi Kovacs
Go to Top of Page

cpthero2
Great Reader

USA
2285 Posts

Posted - 21 Feb 2020 :  06:48:59  Show Profile  Visit cpthero2's Homepage Send cpthero2 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Acolyte MrSukx,

I assure you, by continuing in such fantastic discussions with the likes of Master Rupert and others, you will come to steep yourself in the epic lore of the Realms!

Best regards,




quote:
Originally posted by MrSukx

Wooly Rupert,
I cannot say one way or the other one how canonical it is or isn't. I'm just learning about most of this stuff to be honest. I'm in the process of the deepplunge into the lore. There really is an amazing amount of lore here at Candlekeep!

Thanks for the reply


Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring
Go to Top of Page

cpthero2
Great Reader

USA
2285 Posts

Posted - 10 Feb 2023 :  17:22:03  Show Profile  Visit cpthero2's Homepage Send cpthero2 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Good morning Master Rupert!

I hope this missive finds you well and in good spirits! :) I come bearing great news, from Ed Greenwood himself nonetheless! :)

I signed up for the Patreon Realms Legendary contributor that Ed released a week or so ago and I've been asking him some questions, and asked him one last night regarding the Emerald Enclave. I think you'll enjoy the answer! :) First, I'll quote something from you for context, since this discussion was a few years ago now.

quote:
What you are doing is taking things out of context and not utilizing other info. It is not being open-minded when you refuse to consider all relevant info. You cited one single data point. One. And it's a data point for which you have absolutely no context at all. And from that one single data point, ignoring ALL other information, you stated "they delight in murdering entire towns". I'm not an ethics junkie. I don't know teleological from deontological from technological. What I do know is that pronouncing judgement based on one single fact and ignoring all other information is wrong. [Bolding added for highlight, not original of course]


So, last night (9 Feb 23) I asked Ed the following question with data:

quote:
— Yesterday at 10:07 PM
Hello @Ed Greenwood. I hope my question finds you well this evening!

In the vein of many of my questions on Candlekeep, I delve into formal ethical analysis a lot, and the Emerald Enclave has been at the center of many rigorous debates there. Specifically regarding something from the Vilhon Reach accessory.

I've been arguing that the Emerald Enclave is responsible for between 713,230 to 2,852,920 million deaths over the course of their existence as an organization.

I would like to know if that is true, based on my reading and citation of the material in the Vilhon Reach accessory, which appears to lay out a consistently violent history. The references I use are below:

- It is widely held by the Harpers that the intention of the druids is to hold the Reach under one central authority, thereby making it easier to establish their political dominance of the area."(Vilhon Reach, p.14)
- That group's violence and ruthlessness are as legendary as the plagues that swept through the Vilhon."(Vilhon Reach, p.17)
- And, of course, the Emerald Enclave continued its militant activities in an effort to protect the interests of Silvanus."(Vilhon Reach, p.10)
- While the church has been accused of horrific actions (such as the "cleansing" of a startup community in Chondalwood in 1362, which was actually performed by the Emerald Enclave), they are guilty of some horrific actions of their own."(Vilhon Reach, p.17)
- Agents of the Emerald Enclave shapeshifted on either side of him and pushed the spellcasting mage into the heart of the volcano. Danirro's ring of feather fall was said to activate, but it only served to offer him a slow death as he floated slowly down into the magma."(Vilhon Reach, p.40)

Since the quote above did say "...as legendary as the plagues..." plural, I referenced an example of the biggest plagues to hit the Vilhon Reach and came up with:

In the Year of the Clinging Death (75 DR), a plague tore through the Vilhon Reach, killing more than 50% of the total population in as little as 10 years.

My take on this is that the Emerald Enclave has killed as many people as the plagues of the Vilhon Reach in light of the quote above citing their ruthlessness and violence being as legendary as those plagues. It seems that is an intention on part of Steven Schend to correlate the plagues and the Enclaves violence. I then came up with a roughed out notion of the losses by looking at demographics from (https://www.realmshelps.net/faerun/vilhon.shtml), and adjusting generously downward.

In 1372, the Vilhon Reach had a population of approximately 5,705,840 (humans 95%, dwarves 2%, elves 1%, lizard-folk 1%). For arguments sakes I reduced that by 75% to 1,426,420 to be underwhelming in figures. I then took 50% of that figure, which appears to be 713,230 whereas the high value shows as 2,852,920.

Does this seem correct Ed?


Tymora be Blessed!!, Ed responded within 51 minutes! Can you believe that? :) Here is his response, just after that! :)

quote:
Ed Greenwood — Yesterday at 10:58 PM
It does. Although everything that we know about the Realms comes to us through unreliable narrators, your conclusion is sound. Your numbers may be off purely because we can't get reliable counting for anything, and I would judge the Enclave to equal the deathcount of one of the smallest plagues, not the largest, but...your reasoning and conclusion, yes. The factor that must always be borne in mind is that ethics are mutable, from place to place, culture to culture, and time to time. We have a tendency to judge others by our own standards, and that is itself shaky ethical ground. However, one can't argue with the deathcount.


Now, what I found interesting about Ed's response, is as you can see, he confirmed that my "...reasoning and conclusion..." were correct. He did in fact as you can also see, correct the expected deathcount from the largest one I cited to the smallest. Of plagues in the Vilhon Reach area, the smallest recorded one was from the Nun River Valley "Rotting War" incident, that,

quote:
Two-thirds of all of the men and women gathered on the Fields of Nun died within minutes. The unfortunate remainder who survived the magical plague stumbled back to their home cities, only to be locked out from their homes by those they had sworn to protect. The surrounding villages and towns inland quickly fell victim to the plague. The civil war had ended, but Arrabar would never regain the control it once had. Chondath formally granted independence to Sembia, hoping to make up in trade what it had lost in control. All of the cities except Iljak declared their independence.


Obviously that amount of people, in accordance with Ed's canon decree, is going to be much less than the range of death I had proposed before, which was between 713,230 to 2,852,920 million deaths; however, as you can see in Ed's response, he left off by saying, "However, one can't argue with the deathcount."

Clearly, Ed, as I have argued before, stated that,

quote:
The factor that must always be borne in mind is that ethics are mutable, from place to place, culture to culture, and time to time.


In my arguments, I have highlighted that different ethics define different morality, i.e. deontology, consequentialism. In this case, it is obvious that the Emerald Enclave take an "ends justify the means" approach, and well................. we can't argue with the deathcount now, can we? ;)

Best regards,



Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring
Go to Top of Page

Ayrik
Great Reader

Canada
7980 Posts

Posted - 10 Feb 2023 :  19:12:54  Show Profile Send Ayrik a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Kuje

But then you get into the problem of having Kelemvor being the deity of ALL the faithless and false ...
Not quite.

Some of the Faithless are still claimed by deities (or their proxies) for whatever reasons. They are taken to whatever afterlife the deity provides them somewhere in the Outer Planes. In rare instances, they are sometimes resurrected or reincarnated in the Realms to serve some specific purpose.

And some of the False still choose to accept pacts with Baatezu/Devils/Fiends. Most of these will likely end up being lemures meeting a quick and ugly end as they are tormented and consumed by others. But they do have a genuine chance in Hell of descending through the ranks - if they're strong, tough, cunning, ambitious, and lucky enough. Whatever pain, horror and suffering awaits them in Hell might still be a preferable option (to them) - they might be ended quickly, they might eventually emerge as powerful immortals - and either fate would be better (to them) than slowly dissolving into unimaginable insanity or rotting oblivion within the screaming Wall. Kelemvor apparently tolerates this practice, or at the least he's apparently been unable to fully halt it.

Various other deities, Powers, planars, and mortals might lure or capture some of the False and the Faithless (and even some of the Faithful). Souls can be useful and valuable commodities. Kelemvor is tasked with preventing such predations, but some of the incursions always do succeed and some of the souls always go missing from his inventory.

The vast majority of False and Faithless do fall under his purview. But there's always chance for souls to slip out of his grasp.

[/Ayrik]

Edited by - Ayrik on 10 Feb 2023 19:23:36
Go to Top of Page

Ayrik
Great Reader

Canada
7980 Posts

Posted - 10 Feb 2023 :  19:26:30  Show Profile Send Ayrik a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Oops. I just noticed this is a necro scroll.

[/Ayrik]
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 2 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Next Page
 New Topic  New Poll New Poll
 Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Jump To:
Candlekeep Forum © 1999-2024 Candlekeep.com Go To Top Of Page
Snitz Forums 2000