I'm sure there are non-undead enemies in RL, but there are heck of a lot undead right? And such a character can still destroy undead.
I have never played or seen ravenloft but from what i hear i think it would be imposable. The plane itself would see to that.
What do you mean, that the forces of undead would be so overwhelming and ferociously destroy an Apostle of Peace?
- Yulian
"If man does find the solution for world peace it will be the most revolutionary reversal of his record we have ever known." - George C. Marshall
I can see no reason that it wouldn't work. But while I'd let it work, I'd make certain prerequisites for it, such as being Innocent or at least never failing a Powers Check, as Enoch said. However, I don't agree with Enoch on the quadruple failure chances - why would a pacifist be more likely to fall to evil than someone else?
Because a person like that would be a true exemplar of virtue. If someone like that were to commit an evil act the Dark Powers would almost certainly take notice and respond. The higher the hero the further the fall.
I can see no reason that it wouldn't work. But while I'd let it work, I'd make certain prerequisites for it, such as being Innocent or at least never failing a Powers Check, as Enoch said. However, I don't agree with Enoch on the quadruple failure chances - why would a pacifist be more likely to fall to evil than someone else?
Because a person like that would be a true exemplar of virtue. If someone like that were to commit an evil act the Dark Powers would almost certainly take notice and respond. The higher the hero the further the fall.
A valid point, certainly, and the only argument I could think of that favors higher failure chances for characters with Vow of Peace (there might be others, though). However, neither the Paladin or the Innocent, the two most radiant examples of Good in the Demiplane, if in two different ways, have any higher chances of failure. I realize that Exalted characters are different, and I'd certainly give them the disruption quality of the Paladin, but I wouldn't make them any more likely to fall because of their virtue. Doing so would not only lessen the enjoyment of the player (it's hard enough to avoid falling from grace without having the cards stacked against you), but also negates the idea that the Dark Powers judge mortals equally - would an example of virtue be more likely to fall than a person already walking the path of corruption? In the end I suppose it all comes down to the individual DM's interpretation of Powers Checks.
A valid point, certainly, and the only argument I could think of that favors higher failure chances for characters with Vow of Peace (there might be others, though). However, neither the Paladin or the Innocent, the two most radiant examples of Good in the Demiplane, if in two different ways, have any higher chances of failure. I realize that Exalted characters are different, and I'd certainly give them the disruption quality of the Paladin, but I wouldn't make them any more likely to fall because of their virtue. Doing so would not only lessen the enjoyment of the player (it's hard enough to avoid falling from grace without having the cards stacked against you), but also negates the idea that the Dark Powers judge mortals equally - would an example of virtue be more likely to fall than a person already walking the path of corruption? In the end I suppose it all comes down to the individual DM's interpretation of Powers Checks.
That makes sense to me. On the other hand, now that I think about it it seems to me that a Paladin or an Innocent would be more likely to attract the attention of the Dark Powers then an ordinary person. A hero committing a deeply evil act would be more note-worthy then a common street thug doing the same.
I don't think that it negates the idea of the Dark powers judging people equally. Rather, I think it implies that people who build themselves up to the point were they can be called holy inherit an increased degree of responsibility. Quite frankly, its more egregious to for a Paladin or a pacifist to sin. They achieved true goodness and threw it away. That, in my mind, makes it doubly evil. They're not just sinning, they're denying Ravenloft one of the heros it so desperately needs.
And actually, I do think that a virtous person would be more likely to fall then a person who is already a bit corrupt. Face it, its much easier to be the marginally good person that most of us are then it is for a saint to remain a saint.
EDIT:
Note that I typed that fairly late a night, so it may or may not make much sense.
I also question the validity of the notion that the Dark Powers judge all mortals equally. We have seen canonical examples of the apparent capriciousness of the DPs (Arkandale, anyone?). I think, if anything, they are going to judge an Exalted exemplar of virtue far more harshly than some Vaasi peasant who's stolen a few things here and there to get by. Also, I think such a person represents something far greater than a Paladin or Innocent, anyway. We're talking someone legendarily good and kind and faithful.
Remember, the setting has an enourmous vein of moral ambiguity running through it, and people, regular people, are going to be watching this person like a hawk to see if they really are as good as has been said. Constant scrutiny can wear at even the best person's nerves, after all.
So I'm not sure it's a great idea to toss that PrC at PCs. I'm sure there are some evil PrCs that aren't appropriate either. But this person would draw the DPs attention as well as any Darklords whom this person presented a threat to, like the Three Hags, Vlad Drakov, Boritsi and Dilisnya, and maybe D'honaire.
- Yulian
"It has been my experience that folks who have no vices have very few virtues." - Abraman Lincoln
I'm definitely going to have to agree with the folks who believe that the more virtuous you are, the longer the fall you have beneath you.
Yes, they have a longer way to fall, but does this mean that they will fall more easily? If you hold yourself to a higher standard than others, you already risk falling, and falling far, without the Dark Powers' intervention, and that's the key to this discussion. In Ravenloft, Exalted characters, just like Paladins, have a very hard time holding the moral high ground - the world seems to be designed to tempt them and make them fail, but they do not have to become shining beacons for the Dark Powers, who already know everything that happens.
As a side note, if I ever had an Exalted character in my campaign, I would say that failing a Powers Check with a failure chance higher than 5% would mean that they lose their Exalted status forever, although they can certainly remain good (if they will, however, after knowing that they have failed their ideals and beliefs, is a completely different matter).
I also question the validity of the notion that the Dark Powers judge all mortals equally. We have seen canonical examples of the apparent capriciousness of the DPs (Arkandale, anyone?).
Speaking from an in-game perspective, I agree that some people would be more likely to attract their attention, mainly those who commit tragic and ironic acts of evil, and this doesn't have to be the über-good. A farmer who kills his seemingly superior brother to prove that he is better than him and then, after killing him, realizes that his brother was the only person who ever loved him is, in my opinion, more tragic and attention-worthy than a Paladin or Exalted who has to kill an evil warlock in his sleep because he would otherwise be immortal, although this, too, is certainly a moral failure for the Paladin or Exalted.
From a game-mechanics perspective, there are no differences in the Powers Checks failure chances (excepting DM's prerogative, of course) depending on what alignment or how corrupted you are, so that's probably where I got the idea that the Dark Powers judge all mortals equally from. Of course, I might also have gotten this idea due to my vision of Ravenloft, but I'm really not sure.
I think, if anything, they are going to judge an Exalted exemplar of virtue far more harshly than some Vaasi peasant who's stolen a few things here and there to get by.
Yes, avoiding moral pitfalls in Ravenloft is certainly hard, and as I said above, an Exalted character should and must hold a higher standard than others, but the Exalted character shouldn't have a larger chance of submitting to the Caress because he had to steal an apple from his neighbour to give to a starving woman than a farmer from Mordent who brutally murders his best friend, which is what would happen if the Powers Checks were quadrupled. Yes, an Exalted character shouldn't steal, which is one of the moral pitfalls I was talking about (steal an apple or let a woman starve?), but the idea of this having a higher chance of failure seems quite ridiculous to me.
Also, I think such a person represents something far greater than a Paladin or Innocent, anyway. We're talking someone legendarily good and kind and faithful.
Yes, but remember that this is Ravenloft - Paladins are legendarily good and kind here, they are what other heroes hear legends of and aspire to be (how many non-fallen, non-dead Paladins are there in Ravenloft, anyway?). And Innocents are perhaps the most precious of all things in Ravenloft, even more so than the most valiant Paladin. So I don't think that Exalted characters are that far above these.
Remember, the setting has an enourmous vein of moral ambiguity running through it, and people, regular people, are going to be watching this person like a hawk to see if they really are as good as has been said. Constant scrutiny can wear at even the best person's nerves, after all.
Which brings us back to my first point, that it's hard enough not to fall without the Dark Powers ganging up on you.
So I'm not sure it's a great idea to toss that PrC at PCs. I'm sure there are some evil PrCs that aren't appropriate either. But this person would draw the DPs attention as well as any Darklords whom this person presented a threat to, like the Three Hags, Vlad Drakov, Boritsi and Dilisnya, and maybe D'honaire.
Well, I suggested that you should give an Exalted character the Disruption ability of the Paladin, which would obviously allow Darklords to notice them. And, yes, there are certainly some PrCs that are not suitable for Ravenloft, either because of their flavor or their mechanics (having to, say, talk to your God every time you level up is impossible in Ravenloft), but I think that Exalted characters would fit quite well in Ravenloft - although they probably wouldn't be around for long.
Yes, I know I'm rambling, and I know that I'm not making much sense. Sorry.
Despite the fact that that RL often *plays* as a world of moral ambiguity the *underpinnings* of a gothic campaign are based on a firm idea of good and evil. Oridinary people may not be able to see evil for what it is, and crimes may go unavenged from one generation to another, but the motive forces of RL never allow hidden sins to just lie. They fester instaed and boil up, usually at inconvient time for the players requiring lots of action to be put right. And can only be put right when the original situation was dealt with.
In a world like that a judge should possibly *offer* a lot of situations that might lead to a fall from grace; to tempt and test the PC who dares to hold himslef (or herself) to a higher standard. But IMO that plays out in drama and storryline rather than in "mechanics". One mechanic I would use though would be to allow DLs to scry on the individual as if they were a Paladin (or Blessed Paladin from HoL). The DLs will be plagued by nightmares of the PC whenever he or she is in their lands.
-Eric Gorman
Yes, an Exalted character shouldn't steal, which is one of the moral pitfalls I was talking about (steal an apple or let a woman starve?), but the idea of this having a higher chance of failure seems quite ridiculous to me.
Just as a reminder: Stealing is usually not a moral issue (good/evil), it's a ethical (law/chaos) one. While most people associate law with goodness and chaos with evil, we all know (within the context of the game), that these fundamental alignment aspects are not absolute (Lawful Evil/Chaotic Good). While a lawful exalted character might blanch at the thought of stealing food to give to a hungry orphan, his/her alignment is more at risk by not stealing the apple than stealing, because the exalted character chose ethics over morality. Likewise, a chaotic exalted character wouldn't have this problem.
The Complete Warrior's Kensai prestige class has an excellent example of a similar situation, look it up, you might be surprised.
Just as a reminder: Stealing is usually not a moral issue (good/evil), it's a ethical (law/chaos) one.
Actually, I based my statement strictly on the rules, which state that Theft, Minor from a friend calls for a Powers Check with a 3% failure chance, and even lists stealing an apple from a fruit stand as an example. Quadrupling this chance would give a failure chance of 12%, which is above comitting Murder, Brutal on a friend, which is 10%.
So what are the other demands of a Innocent, other than the risk or the horror effect or turning?
Total newbie question, how difficult is it to keep your innocent status? Why are some poster seemingly assume that an Exalted character would stray from the path of being an Innocent? Innocents don't have to make power checks right?
Actually an Innocent does have to make a Dark Powers check, at which point the state of Innocence is lost, whether the character fails the check or not.
Actually an Innocent does have to make a Dark Powers check, at which point the state of Innocence is lost, whether the character fails the check or not.
I finally bought the Ravenloft book last night. So after reading it, the answer to my orginal question is yes, the Vow of Peace could work quite well, but would be challenging.
And if an innocent had to make the powers check they would loose their innocent status, but if they didn't rob, lying, steal, murdrer etc,.. the check would never come up.
My real question was really could a character realistically retain their ethical integrity in a world run by the Dark Powers. And the answer seems to be that it would be tested, perhaps harshly, but the Powers wouldn't get together and make it their mission to squash the exalted character. At least not in a way where the character wouldn't have a fighting chance to maintain their moral imperative.
don't forget that all clerics make powers checks at double the listed failure chance. My suggestion was an extension of that rule.
Don't have my books in front of me but I'm pretty sure thats part of the "optional" rules that got inserted into the 3.5 RL PHB. Along with making a powers check to level up as a fighter or learn tenser's floating disk that rule is a good candidate for storage in a circular file.
-Eric Gorman
Don't have my books in front of me but I'm pretty sure thats part of the "optional" rules that got inserted into the 3.5 RL PHB. Along with making a powers check to level up as a fighter or learn tenser's floating disk that rule is a good candidate for storage in a circular file.
-Eric Gorman
Wait - a Powers Check to learn Tenser's Floating Disk? Why in all the hells would that be? A lot of spells I can totally understand, a platform to move your stuff around on I cannot.
- Yulian
"If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions?" - Scott Adams
Wait - a Powers Check to learn Tenser's Floating Disk? Why in all the hells would that be? A lot of spells I can totally understand, a platform to move your stuff around on I cannot.
I think, if I remember that particular Murphy's rule correctly, that spellcasters would take powers checks on learning spells from the Invocation/Evocation school, on account of so many of them are used to summon extraplanar creatures.... but then you get spells that only handle pure force, like the Floating Disk, and it suddenly becomes ridiculous.