It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like:Chrome,Firefox,Internet Explorer orOpera

×
avatar
Jonesy89: Fair enough; I'd definitely get that from starting BG2 without having played the first, but having played the first, we know that the characters would not do that.
avatar
olnorton: The point is that he messed with your brain, and so you have the option of not remembering anything you did in BG1.
True enough. Thankfully the game doesn't force saving Imoen on you as the motive for driving the plot should she not be someone you are crazy about traveling with, instead allowing you to state that you are looking to take revenge on Irenicus; chances are one or the other will appeal to the character, especially if trying to roleplay as a Paladin (save person wrongfully victimized person or enact vigilante justice if you run with a more deconstructionist view regarding Paladins an Lawful Good in general).
Yes, I wouldn't think a Lawful Paladin, would want to interfere with Cowled Wizards carrying out their lawful duty.
Imoen's ignorance of the law being no lawful excuse.
avatar
olnorton: Yes, I wouldn't think a Lawful Paladin, would want to interfere with Cowled Wizards carrying out their lawful duty.
Imoen's ignorance of the law being no lawful excuse.
Depends on how you interpret Lawful. I think 2E mentioned that even a Paladin wouldn't abide by a law they found unjust, and the whole "lock people away without trial" thing might qualify. Then again, under a more rigid interpretation of Lawful Good, there is no motive to save Imoen (she violated the law) or pursue Irenicus (violated the law, already being punished, can only accomplish revenge, revenge incompatible with justice).
avatar
olnorton: Yes, I wouldn't think a Lawful Paladin, would want to interfere with Cowled Wizards carrying out their lawful duty.
Imoen's ignorance of the law being no lawful excuse.
avatar
Jonesy89: Depends on how you interpret Lawful. I think 2E mentioned that even a Paladin wouldn't abide by a law they found unjust, and the whole "lock people away without trial" thing might qualify. Then again, under a more rigid interpretation of Lawful Good, there is no motive to save Imoen (she violated the law) or pursue Irenicus (violated the law, already being punished, can only accomplish revenge, revenge incompatible with justice).
She broke no law. Using magic is not tolerated, but is not officially legislated against. The Cowled Wizards, who maintain the unjust 'law', are not law makers. They are uncontrolled, even by the Athkatlan government -- the government tolerates the wizards because it serves their interests to do so. No paladin worth his/her station would uphold such an unjust punishment.

Edit: Correction. Using unlicensed magic is not tolerated. Bribes are the only way to become 'licensed', or "sanctioned" as the Cowled Wizards put it. Bribes are unlawful.
Post edited March 24, 2014 by Hickory
avatar
Jonesy89: Depends on how you interpret Lawful. I think 2E mentioned that even a Paladin wouldn't abide by a law they found unjust, and the whole "lock people away without trial" thing might qualify. Then again, under a more rigid interpretation of Lawful Good, there is no motive to save Imoen (she violated the law) or pursue Irenicus (violated the law, already being punished, can only accomplish revenge, revenge incompatible with justice).
avatar
Hickory: She broke no law. Using magic is not tolerated, but is not officially legislated against. The Cowled Wizards, who maintain the unjust 'law', are not law makers. They are uncontrolled, even by the Athkatlan government -- the government tolerates the wizards because it serves their interests to do so. No paladin worth his/her station would uphold such an unjust punishment.

Edit: Correction. Using unlicensed magic is not tolerated. Bribes are the only way to become 'licensed', or "sanctioned" as the Cowled Wizards put it. Bribes are unlawful.
If it weren't for states actually playing a role in punishing the unlicensed practice of law, there would be a perfect bar association joke in there somewhere :) After all, you can only be a member after you pay an exorbitant fee to take the test and then become a member so long as you abide by the local rules of the profession, but if you haven't paid the fee, trying to practice law will get you in trouble.

In all seriousness, the Cowled Wizards might not be subject to the laws of Athlatka, but the rules they impose on magic users in the city seems to be a form of law in and of itself, especially since Athlatka's tolerance of them could be argued to be equivalent to approval of and adopting it. It might not be "the" law, but it's still an imposed set of rules regulating certain actions, and Athlatka arguably is condoning it by not legislating against them; then again, that could just be because noone wants to say something bad about the nice wizards who can and do chuck people in prison without any form of due process.
Post edited March 24, 2014 by Jonesy89
avatar
Jonesy89: In all seriousness, the Cowled Wizards might not be subject to the laws of Athlatka, but the rules they impose on magic users in the city seems to be a form of law in and of itself, especially since Athlatka's tolerance of them could be argued to be equivalent to approval of and adopting it. It might not be "the" law, but it's still an imposed set of rules regulating certain actions, and Athlatka arguably is condoning it by not legislating against them; then again, that could just be because noone wants to say something bad about the nice wizards who can and do chuck people in prison without any form of due process.
Yes, but we're talking about paladins -- more precisely a paladin's conscience -- here. A paladin may be L/G, but they still have a very strong moral compass, and like I said, no paladin worth their title would uphold unofficial 'laws' based on open bribery.
Post edited March 24, 2014 by Hickory
avatar
Jonesy89: In all seriousness, the Cowled Wizards might not be subject to the laws of Athlatka, but the rules they impose on magic users in the city seems to be a form of law in and of itself, especially since Athlatka's tolerance of them could be argued to be equivalent to approval of and adopting it. It might not be "the" law, but it's still an imposed set of rules regulating certain actions, and Athlatka arguably is condoning it by not legislating against them; then again, that could just be because noone wants to say something bad about the nice wizards who can and do chuck people in prison without any form of due process.
avatar
Hickory: Yes, but we're talking about paladins -- more precisely a paladin's conscience -- here. A paladin may be L/G, but they still have a very strong moral compass, and like I said, no paladin worth their title would uphold unofficial 'laws' based on open bribery.
I concur that a Paladin would probably act (ignorance of the law or no, Imoen got nabbed for lashing out at someone who had been torturing her, and jailing them both without entertaining the concept of mitigating circumstances or any number of defenses hardly seems just), but I would point out that it does cut both ways; after all, we call it bribery, but it's close to being a legitimate membership fee, and might as well be if Athlatka's silence is intended to be a manifestation of government approval if not a tacit grant of government authority. I'm not entirely convinced, I'm just saying someone roleplaying a hardcore Lawful alignment *cough*Vhailor*cough* could interpret the situation that way.
Post edited March 24, 2014 by Jonesy89
avatar
Hickory: Yes, but we're talking about paladins -- more precisely a paladin's conscience -- here. A paladin may be L/G, but they still have a very strong moral compass, and like I said, no paladin worth their title would uphold unofficial 'laws' based on open bribery.
avatar
Jonesy89: I concur that a Paladin would probably act (ignorance of the law or no, Imoen got nabbed for lashing out at someone who had been torturing her, and jailing them both without entertaining the concept of mitigating circumstances or any number of defenses hardly seems just), but I would point out that it does cut both ways; after all, we call it bribery, but it's close to being a legitimate membership fee, and might as well be if Athlatka's silence is intended to be a manifestation of government approval if not a tacit grant of government authority. I'm not entirely convinced, I'm just saying someone roleplaying a hardcore Lawful alignment *cough*Vhailor*cough* could interpret the situation that way.
It may 'cut both ways' to you, but to a devout L/G paladin it's clear: bribery is a crime. To side with such an invalid 'law' would be condoning it, and wholly against not only his/her morals, but their law ethics, too. I accept that some people might interpret it differently, but I honestly think a paladin would not.
avatar
Jonesy89: I concur that a Paladin would probably act (ignorance of the law or no, Imoen got nabbed for lashing out at someone who had been torturing her, and jailing them both without entertaining the concept of mitigating circumstances or any number of defenses hardly seems just), but I would point out that it does cut both ways; after all, we call it bribery, but it's close to being a legitimate membership fee, and might as well be if Athlatka's silence is intended to be a manifestation of government approval if not a tacit grant of government authority. I'm not entirely convinced, I'm just saying someone roleplaying a hardcore Lawful alignment *cough*Vhailor*cough* could interpret the situation that way.
avatar
Hickory: It may 'cut both ways' to you, but to a devout L/G paladin it's clear: bribery is a crime. To side with such an invalid 'law' would be condoning it, and wholly against not only his/her morals, but their law ethics, too. I accept that some people might interpret it differently, but I honestly think a paladin would not.
So long as the Paladin sees it as bribery, I would generally concur.