How can Isis be good?

[kiralon]

I will say the other thing about these conversations though is people tend to take a much closer look at the rules and can still, even after all these years find stuff that they hadn't seen and/or get ideas they might not have had if they didn't. It's really only annoying (to me at least) if they write out ideas but won't say why they think that, but it usually makes me dig in more. This thread is a perfect example, eliakon mentioned that my tale about the farmers and the goblin raiders was a false dichotomy, then totally failed in showing a reason why, or other reasons, and to me that's just bad manners, but I'm happy to debate anything and everything, and even be the devils advocate against things I believe if I think there is a good argument there. I have just been in another that made me look up a lot of info on wheat that I didn't know. I'm a DM, and now my party members are going to find out just how much fun wheat isn't when you have to transport it as a job they will be encouraged to pick up will be to transport a load of wheat to a starving village as relief, and even though they will have a certain amount spare, a certain amount of it will have to make it, and that wouldn't have happened without discussions here.

But the other rule that I had never noticed before was the one about magic and hth combat, and the fact that you can't be in hth combat and cast spells, and that if you get hit it has a %90 chance of interrupting the spell, and you can't cast spells when taking damage or in pain it seems. That came from a discussion here earlier too. (I must say I still don't use it because my players have been taught to play the way I was taught)

[pestigor]

I liked reading the views of the posters here because I had no idea about this Isis situation and everyone makes good points when they’re expressed as opinions but not when the views are delivered in the fashion of an ultimatum. Point and counter point is a great way to learn new things you just have to be open to new ideas. If a person isn’t into new ideas maybe a public forum isn’t the right spot for them.

[42dragon]

I have posed the below questions and thought exercise quite some time ago. But I think it still applies.

How do/would you handle alignments of other races?

One problem we have is we are viewing this from a human point of view.

Would you be considered an evil alignment for the whole sale slaughter of an entire colony? ............Before you answer.

What if that colony is a colony of ants, building a nest right outside your home and invading your kitchen? What if it is a colony of prairie dogs that is being uprooted and killed to make room for your farm and crops? What if it is a colony of cows you are breeding and caring for until the time is right to slaughter them for food?

Your answer may be evil or not depending on your views, which is fine. You make take the approach that the examples above are not sentient life forms so it is not as big of a deal. Or you may still find it reprehensible. Or some of it not alignment affecting while others are. OK.

But look at this from another beings point of view. Say the war like Gromek who are said to have completely conquered their home world. All other creatures on their home world could be considered lesser beings to them. Perhaps even humans on that world are raised and breed for food. From a human point of view of course they are all evil. But to the average Gromek who would be the evil one, the Gromek raising humans as food for the populace and armies or the Gromek who is sabotaging operations and disrupting the food supply violently or not (i.e. terrorist)?

What about an even more extreme step in race like a Dragon. Most other species are significantly lesser beings to them. To most dragons humans are playthings. Something similar to a loved pet at best, or an invasive pest like ants to others. Applying human alignment (good, selfish, evil) to their actions only makes sense when looking at them from the outside human point of view. Would one dragon eating a dwarf because he looked and smelled tasty (i know a stretch) be considered evil to another dragon? Probably if that other dragon considered all lesser creatures as cherished pets, but not to another dragon (good alignment) who in his experience has always been persecuted by knights trying to slay him even though he has never eaten one and only killed in self defense but still considers lesser being pests.

Then there was other beings gods. Most gods are considered to be an aspect of some concept. For example we were discussing Rurga Goddess of War and Honor (Truth). To this god the aspect of truth is held above all others. Would these aspects that they represent/embody override or supersede the stated alignment given by the writers? You can take the alignment but wouldn't you have to compare each of the guidelines to the point of view of the aspect not the point of view as a human?

Also would a stated good/principled alignment long lived being (dragon or god) who thinks/knows they can see the big picture. Be willing to kill an innocent small child while in disguise, which in turn will hurt the child and family and perhaps a community. But that act will lead to a small war with a neighboring kingdom that will cost 1000 lives over 2 months. But after that a new unified kingdom will spring up ushering in a 300 year time of peace and prosperity for the region. And the long lived being leaves the area forever, does not take credit, nor live and thrive in the new peaceful area. The act wasn't done for its own sake. ???

[Prysus]

But the other rule that I had never noticed before was the one about magic and hth combat, and the fact that you can't be in hth combat and cast spells, and that if you get hit it has a %90 chance of interrupting the spell, and you can't cast spells when taking damage or in pain it seems. That came from a discussion here earlier too. (I must say I still don't use it because my players have been taught to play the way I was taught)

Greetings and Salutations. I'm interested in learning the source (book and page) for that information. Thank you for any help. Farewell and safe journeys.

[kiralon]

But the other rule that I had never noticed before was the one about magic and hth combat, and the fact that you can't be in hth combat and cast spells, and that if you get hit it has a %90 chance of interrupting the spell, and you can't cast spells when taking damage or in pain it seems. That came from a discussion here earlier too. (I must say I still don't use it because my players have been taught to play the way I was taught)

Greetings and Salutations. I'm interested in learning the source (book and page) for that information. Thank you for any help. Farewell and safe journeys.

surprisingly, first and second edition main book under hand to hand combat rules

Page 46 left hand column second paragraph down for second ed.
Magic Attacks: Most men of magic get two spell attacks per melee
round (each spell casting counts as two or three melee attacks). A spell
caster actively engaged in hand to hand combat, parrying, dodging, and
taking damage cannot focus enough to cast a spell. There is a 1-90%
likelihood that a spell caster will lose his concentration if struck a painful
blow, preventing the casting of a spell. Note: this applies to both
men of magic and clergy

Page 41 second last paragraph down on right hand side of first ed rulebook
MAGIC ATTACKS AND HAND TO HAND COMBAT
Most men of magic get two magic attacks per level upon attaining a
certain level of skill. This applies ONLY to the casting of magic and is
not applicable to hand to hand combat.
A spell caster actively engaged in hand to hand combat, parrying,
dodging, and taking damage, is too busy to concentrate on spell
casting; they CANNOT cast spells while directly involved in hand to
hand combat. (The mind mage is the only exception to this rule. He is
able to strike both psionically and physically simultaneously.) A spell
caster will break concentration 90% of the time of the time if struck a painful
blow, preventing the casting of a spell. Note: this applies to both men
of magic and clergy.

It's funny how offhand blurbs like this change the game a bit totally. Somehow I feel this should also be in the magic combat page.
Apparently if you want to control a man of magic just keep him poking with something sharp while he is in full plate, if anyone remembers the how to stop magic users when they are prisoners thread.

[kiralon]

And I truly wonder how many people actually play with this rule, as I haven't heard anyone else mention it, and I have played with a few other longtime gamers of the system.