As of 591 CY, this small city (pop. 6,100) in the Wild Coast has been described as having "an aggressive and slightly paranoid atomosphere." Only 30 miles from the buffer zone that divides it from the Orcish Empire of the Pomarj, it's also been said not to take kindly to humanoids (even half-orcs).
Also, I seem to remember (can't recall the source) that it almost has the feel of an "armed camp."
Any suggestions?
Thanks
Militia = LN
Citizens = NG
The Rest = CN
Thanks for the feedback.
I generally agree with Abysslin
My suggestion...
Militia = LN
Citizens = NG
The Rest = CN
The military are definitely LN (order is paramount)
Citizens are NG, they accept the strict rules and curtailed freedom as neccessary to preserve the city to stave off a greater evil (Turrosh Mak). To maintain their city in the face of this threat they allowed the military to kill half-orcs as a future threat, use of chained convicts for look outs and forced labor. Definitely not the actions of LG or CG ethos. They will accept whatever serves the "greater good" as they see it.
The Rest, why so narrow...
CN : may hate the strict rules but as long as the "personal goals" are met, combat, wealth, patriotism or vengence etc.
LN : can be found in Safeton, strict merchants, professional mercenaries, inquistors, by the book officials would be right at home...just following orders, Sir.
LE : Would be happy here, a society under strain is an opportunity for these folks and the raiding offers an opportunity for advancement, these are the type of people "get the job done I don't care how" perhaps the gov't would turn to these types within the ranks or mercenaries to handle the "dirty assignments".
NE : Are always at the front, mercenaries who see profit, corrupt officials or most logically given Safeton plight, war profiteers merchant types, after all safeton needs weapons, equipment, food, spell components, luxury items, buy "goods recovered" from southern raids etc. So what if a merchant makes a bit more (call it danger pay). It's not like Safeton can afford to turn away help of any sort.
All these types would be in Safeton, granted most would be watched and not particularly liked by the average joe until he needs something but if having them on the wall protects his family, the "greater good" is served isn't it.
"an aggressive and slightly paranoid atomosphere." Only 30 miles from the buffer zone that divides it from the Orcish Empire of the Pomarj, it's also been said not to take kindly to humanoids
"armed camp."
I would say Lawful Good.
Lawful in that a Hierarchy has been established..."armed camp". That Hierarchy has a direction and goal: to protect itself/the area against Orcs. I would say 'Good' because Orcs are generally 'evil'. Killing off Orcs is a good thing in that regard.
The "orcs" killed were half-orc citizens killed because they could become a security threat in the future.
1) Pre-emptive Genocide
2) Forced Conscription
3) Forced Labour
Doesn't sound like a LG city to me.
Given the crisis and emphasis on order: LN (LE) is my opinion.
Remember Turin Deathstalker runs the city, he isn't a paladin :D
Safe Town [Safeton] was called such as it was so able to defend itself from external assault, though the town itself was quite lawless in its early years. (When the town became much better policed in the current century, it was said to have always had safe streets--a common remark that simply isn't true. After the fall of the southern Wild Coast, Safeton has slid toward evil once more.)
Until this point, I had been in the LN camp--but this passage, in addition to Crag's above post, makes me think LE.
Also, where are the references to Turin Deathstalker in The Adventure Begins with regards to his role in Safeton?
However, GA noted Turin's alignment as LE (LN), and FtA's Campaign Book detailed Safeton and featured Turin's role. See id. at 51-52. The FtA entry notes that military rule was imposed and that a nighttime curfew is enforced by the Greyhawk militia, except for the "notorious Dock District." Id. at 51. "Life is tough and bloody here; many of the native folk are of evil alignments and some of them are as brutal as any orc bandit ..." Id. Also, as of 585 CY, slave labor was being used to construct the stone wall. Finally, Turin devised "Penal Militias, which use convicted criminals to man lookout posts and sea defenses. These men are shackled to their posts and only given arms if the need is desperate. See id. at 52.
Based on that description, IMC Safeton's overall alignment is LE (N) -- indicating that law is used not only to maintain social control but also to justify Turin's military rule, which overwhelms respect for life and the promotion of weal, which are goodly principles. However, I like the nuances suggested by other posters although I don't understand the distinction between "citizens" and "the rest."
Abysslin and Crag, will you explain what you meant?
I simply used Abysslin post as a format:
My suggestion...
Militia = LN
Citizens = NG
The Rest = CN
The way I interpreted the post above was: (group generalization)
Militia (LN) : The military forces and their accepted practises to fullfill their duties
Citizens (NG) : The law-abiding average joe: butcher, baker and candlestick maker type
The Rest (CN) : I took to mean the "transit or adventuring types" such as hired mercenaries, mages, crusading priests, independent thieves, smugglers and various spies.
Hope this helped and cleared up the confusion :D
If I am completely wrong Abysslin :embarrass
I deffinitely would not go LE. Aside from the few notables (mentioned) and perhaps a handful of adventuring groups, I would imagine LE to be rather non-existant in Safeton.
You can't ever really shoot for a single alignment to label most settlements of peoples, specially when you're talking about the diverse schools of thought amongst the human races.
If I had to absolutely name a single alignment for Safeton, I would go with the majority population and run with NG.
Most of Safeton's militia (not to be confused with military!) are outsiders, not plowshares turned swordsmen.
Once the dust settles and Safeton once again becomes a secure population, the Lawful aspects will dwindle, the Evil aspects will disappear, and it (Safeton) will revert naturally back to the "easy feel" of NG prominance at which time I would feel most comfortable labelling the settlement with a single, dominant alignment.
EDIT: I also wanted to state that most of the Lawful aspect would come from Safeton's semi-state of martial law rather than the mindset of the general populace.
The alignment of the ruler or rulers of a community need not conform to the alignment of all or even the majority of the residents, although this is usually the case. In any case, the alignment of the power center stongly shapes the residents' daily lives. (p. 138 3.5 DMG)
So, in fact, to determine Safeton's "alignment" for its stat block entry (if one were to make it up), one would not consider the majority population. We have to look at those in charge.
With a population of a little over 6,000 in 591 CY, Safeton has—as a small city—two power centers (see the chart on p. 137). I think abysslin, cwslyclgh, and Crag nailed squarely the first power center of Safeton—its LN Militia (the "armed camp" angle). Yes, the Militia is outnumbered by the larger (perhaps) N or NG commoner—but the commoners aren't what's in question. Using the DMG's terms for power center alignment, I'd describe Safeton's first power center as Conventional, Lawful Neutral.
I think Crag makes a nice suggestion for the second power center: Turin Deathstalker. I finally found (thanks for the directions) the passage in TAB that describes his relation to Safeton:
...formerly the Guildmaster of Assassins in Greyhawk...[Turin] was made Commander of the Greyhawk Militia garrison at Safeton, where he remains today. Turin looks for the most aggressive, dangerous fighters, hiring them to make raids into the orc-held Wild Coast south of Safeton. Casualties among the raiders are high, but many enjoy these violent fights and return for several missions.
Since Turin Deathstalker is Lawful Evil himself (and 18th level in 2nd edition), I think Crag is right to put a LE slant to Safeton's power center. I'd actually call Deathstalker Safeton's second power center: a Nonstandard, Lawful Evil one.
Let's face it, the majority of commoners/average joes everywhere is going to be N or NG. They just want to tend their garden (or whatever) and sort of get along.
But that's not what a settlement's alignment (as a 3.5 term) addresses. It describes the rulers who are—yes—in the minority, but who nonetheless "strongly shape the residents' daily lives."
I'd say the daily lives of Safeton's residents are most strongly shaped by the ever-alert (paranoid?) Militia, and the harsh, guiding hand of Turin Deathstalker.
Abysslin, why do you imagine the majority of Safeton's people are NG in alignment? Is there a canon source, perhaps one of the A-series, or is the idea your own?
From what I've read, Safeton, like most of the Wild Coast towns didn't tend toward Goodness but instead reveled in the greyness of Neutrality. Additionally, as a port town, Safeton's docks tended to be unruly although other parts were stable enough to support a permanent market.
After the Greyhawk Wars, Turin formed the primary power center of Safeton. Therefore, IMC, since Turin is LE (lN) and commands the militia, the power center of Safeton is LE (LN). The secondary power center, to the degree it exists, consists of the merchant class that once controlled Safeton (IMC), and likely venerates Xerbo (since the region was predominatly influenced by the Suel). The majority of Safeton's commoners likely tend toward N although there are significant minorities of people who manifest the other alignments. Finally, recall that "[s]always existed in Safeton, and many used to be sold to the Pomarj[.]" FtA: Campaign Book 51.
From what I've read, Safeton, like most of the Wild Coast towns didn't tend toward Goodness but instead reveled in the greyness of Neutrality.
Well, "Nuetrality" is the better part of NG.
100 points nuetral, 5 points good?
100 points nuetral, 100 points good?
/shrug
Additionally, as a port town, Safeton's docks tended to be unruly although other parts were stable enough to support a permanent market.
My first post: "The Rest = CN"
Turin is LE (LN) and commands the militia, the power center of Safeton is LE (LN).
I agree that the militia is LN and have already stated as such through-out this thread.
Turin, being 1 person of the greater scheme determines the overall alingment of a settlement? 3rd Ed. is odd, indeed.
Why is the "power center" alignment of any worth? Unless your group is going to be dealing directly with the leadership, they (and the DM) will primarily be dealing with the alignment of the populace. (Some settlements such as many of the Aerdy cities are an exception ofcourse.)
Also, I should say that I too, discern a settlements alignment by it's leadership. (odd) However, in the case of Safeton, the current (and possibly more into the future) "power center" alignment(s) is only temporary. (so far)
Using 3rd Ed. model, the power center should be LN, right? Turin is LE, but following the chain of command, You'll find the ranks filled with LN. So wouldn't it be LN? Or is the "ruler" of a city such that you would label the city with that ruler's alignment as LE (LN) as above? If the latter is the case, then why would the original question have even presented itself in this thread? It would appear that some one would've pointed to Turin's alignment and "case closed".... LE it be.
Eitherway, I would agree the "power center" alignment is LNish. Forgive my ignorance of the 3rd Ed. term.
If a discussion came up in my household among (2nd Ed.) gamers, I believe the general consensus would lead to NG.
As even a game mechanic, I suppose "power center alignment" is certainly up for debate. I've always enjoyed using it in helping my description of a settlement's "vibe" for my players, and I've also devised some crunchy bits wherein the alignment affects certain social skill rolls (e.g. Gathering Information in a CG settlement gets a few bonuses over doing the same in a LE one—but I'll leave the details of this houserule for another thread).
Since the thread began, I've been digging a little deeper into the sources, and have found, indeed, some information concerning the general populous. I think even they are Neutral at best:
Life is tough and bloody here; many of the native folk are of evil alignments and some of them are as brutal as any orc bandit pillaging and slaying farmsteads (FtA, Campagin Book p. 51)
From the same source, here's an interesting comparison with Narwell:
While Safeton is brute force and strength, Narwell is a subtler, wilier kind of city. It has evil folk aplenty, but they tend to be thieves and bandits rather than the brutish men of Safeton
Anyway, all of this is just food for thought, and (for me at least) makes for fun posting.
I just recalled: in Return to the Temple of Elem. Evil, I believe Monte Cook actually did rate the power center of the village of Hommlet as NG (oops, actually it had become a small town, by then). And I wouldn't argue that its general population is very different from this.
But Safeton strikes me as different, and it seems the canon sources reflect this: the history of slavery, the recent use of slavery (to build the stone walls), the massacre of humanoids, the paranoia, fear, and "the slide toward evil once again" (TAB 56). I think Safeton is more than merely an example of "good folk under the thumb of oppression"; it seems to me that a great deal of its folk are willingly complicit with this evil slide—and more folk than the usual "bad seed minority" found even in more stongly aligned "good" settlements.
McBard have to say your quotes have me convinced, sorry abysslin.
Maybe it's just that I don't see the City of Greyhawk openly allowing evil to florish BUT Safeton was a former Wild Coast city and Greyhawk is stretched pretty thin.
Given the threat of the orcs, I can see the thieves (mayor) taking a pragmatic approach to Safeton something along the lines of..."out of sight, out of mind, provided Turin keeps the orcs at bay".
Given the brutal bent of the populace cited in McBard's examples...a LG administration could cause a popular revolt, curiously the brutal citizens of safeton may feel more comfortable under Turin's harsh rule than say a goody goody paladin from their pov.