A bit of criticism

[Saulus]

This discussion has gone way OT so I'll be closing it on this ending note.

The problem I have with this particular example of Evil Helmites is that it proposes far too many problems if players do it in this particular instance because of the very distinct role they serve in Sundren and the populace's general attitude about them.

[Lanthar]

Laws exist for the good of the People (LG)

Laws exist for the good of the state (LN)

Laws are the State (LE)

Thats a realy good way to explain it. . and Helm is quite known to be cold.

[Myrddin]

Honestly, I just see a LE Cleric of Helm who honestly feels the end justifies the means. If ripping the heart out of some law breaker serves the greater glory of Helm. He or she would not think twice about doing it. If he knew that a Law Breaker was guilty, he or she would not think twice about using thumbscrews to extract the confusion. And there are those who need to have the Law foce upon them for their own sakes. Or more simple put...

Laws exist for the good of the People (LG)

Laws exist for the good of the state (LN)

Laws are the State (LE)

[Araxielle]

I don't mean to pile on but I think this is important so I want to add my opinion - I agree entirely with Lanthar and Myrddin on this issue. Though obviously it's the DMs' call, I hope it's understood that not all "evil" is visible to the naked eye. A lawful evil character may protect others and I don't picture it as so much as affecting their methods (that seems more like a chaos vs law thing) so much as the drive behind it. A priest of helm that was "evil" for example might just be protecting others for his own selfish purposes, and not for the good of all - but he still does Helm's work and does in fact protect them.

And if evil characters weren't meant for the god in some capacity, I think he would've been lawful good, don't you think?

I'm -really- not big on restricting roleplay based on certain categories that players are forced to fit our characters into. I hope that both Saulus will give it a second thought and that other DMs could maybe chime in on the issue.

[Lanthar]

Helm is a guardian, he protects the weak, those who cannot protect themselves, the innocent, etc. That is his dogma.

So you're telling me an evil cleric (an evil cleric by nature would not do the above) would get spells from Helm? No, definetly not.

Evil Cleric of Helm isn't happening.

Acualy, clerics of Helm can be LG LN and LE. . and thats truth. . I know its odd, but they do exist. . Helm have paladins AND evil clerics in his church. . its a bit odd. . evil clerics of Helm are very faithfull offcourse as they are clerics, but if they would see someone in the streets who where bleeding to death and this person wasnt a faithfull of Helm he would probobly care little to help this person unless he converted to Helm.

Same with Kelemvor, you can be paladin of Kelemvor, and you can be a LE cleric of him aswell.

But if you dont want to see this in Sundren, its your call. . but if you follow the Forgotten Realms champaign setting its a possibility. . check the AL recuirements for Helm clerics and Kelemvor clerics.

[Myrddin]

Not everything is perfect. We can't moderate anything, I'm just expressing Sundren's stance on Evil Helmites.

I shall not trouble you further then.

[Saulus]

Not everything is perfect. We can't moderate anything, I'm just expressing Sundren's stance on Evil Helmites.

[Myrddin]

Well there's no Orc race available to players, so not having Gruumsh as an option doesn't play well with the design of the world as the Hands of Gruumsh is a special faction.

Helm is a major diety in Sundren and his neutrality is important, most of his followers are good. You aren't going to see evil clerics of Helm because it would be completely unacceptable by the policies of the Church to condone the actions of such a character. Regardless of how secretive said character is, or what the canon says, I don't want to see evil clerics of helm because it is conflicting in many ways (namely the fact that Helm's dogma makes being evil very difficult, almost impossible really).

I do not belive this addresses the question or the point I was trying to make. Then again, perhaps my short comings are preventing me from being clear on this. But a 1/2 Orc Evil Cleric of an known Evil Humaniod God, who preaches the rule of the Orc over all other races, befriending followers of Helm. Isn't that just a wee bit over the top?

[Saulus]

Well there's no Orc race available to players, so not having Gruumsh as an option doesn't play well with the design of the world as the Hands of Gruumsh is a special faction.

Helm is a major diety in Sundren and his neutrality is important, most of his followers are good. You aren't going to see evil clerics of Helm because it would be completely unacceptable by the policies of the Church to condone the actions of such a character. Regardless of how secretive said character is, or what the canon says, I don't want to see evil clerics of helm because it is conflicting in many ways (namely the fact that Helm's dogma makes being evil very difficult, almost impossible really).

[Myrddin]

That's precisely my point, Sundren has its own house rules. And that's what this forum is for. Clarification.

Then why allow 1/2 Orc Clerics of a God that would not only them to interact with non-Orcs? Grummsh is just as particular as Helm. Really now didn?t your mother tell you to not play with your food?

And, isn?t' having a 1/2 Orc Cleric of Grummsh hunting Orcs like have Pat Robertson hunt down his own parishioners? Yes, you might say he is weed out the weak, but honestly that argument tends to beg the question.

[Saulus]

But on page 28 of the Forgotten Realms Faiths and Pantheons is says, "Clerics of Helm never commmand undead, although evil clerics may rebuke them."

*shrugs* Stiil it is house rules and all that.

That's precisely my point, Sundren has its own house rules. And that's what this forum is for. Clarification.

[Myrddin]

But on page 28 of the Forgotten Realms Faiths and Pantheons is says, "Clerics of Helm never commmand undead, although evil clerics may rebuke them."

*shrugs* Stiil it is house rules and all that.

[Saulus]

Then just to be clear: You won't see evil clerics of Helm in Sundren.

[Myrddin]

Helm is a guardian, he protects the weak, those who cannot protect themselves, the innocent, etc. That is his dogma.

So you're telling me an evil cleric (an evil cleric by nature would not do the above) would get spells from Helm? No, definetly not.

Evil Cleric of Helm isn't happening.

Personally, I don't play evil characters. So for myself, I don't have a care one way or the other. But I will ask having a license to be Judge, Jury and Executioner is James Bond Good or Evil? Personally, he?s an assassin and ASSASSINS are evil, so if assassins are evil, then James Bond is EVIL.

And, what you are telling me is an Evil Character would NOT protect the State. Why not? All being evil means is he or she would say the end justifies the means.

Take the Bounty Hunter, ?You?re worth more to me alive than dead, but I?ll take you either way.? He?s living within the definition of the law, but he don?t sound like he?s going to be canonized by the Pope anytime soon to me.

[Saulus]

I beg to differ, Helm is a Lawful Neutral God, good and evil have no sway over law.
So as long as the Cleric acts within the confines of the LAW, helm would have no issue with the actions. If there can be followers of the God that are Lawful Evil, then one can argue that there can be Lawful Evil Clerics.

And, to disallow Lawful Evil Clerics is to limit the scope of RP, in my humble and aged opinion.

Helm is a guardian, he protects the weak, those who cannot protect themselves, the innocent, etc. That is his dogma.

So you're telling me an evil cleric (an evil cleric by nature would not do the above) would get spells from Helm? No, definetly not.

Evil Cleric of Helm isn't happening.