BGTSCC Banned Faiths

[Rakosi]

Worship/Preaching of The Following Deities:

Bane
Bhaal
Loviatar
Malar
Myrkul
Shar
Talos
//further dieties may be added in the future//

In the Laws of the Land thread these are the Gods listed for whom worship and preaching is banned/punished in the Duchal Lands. The reason I've started this thread is because I strongly, and now assuredly, believe these IC rulings are entirely counterintuitive to good RP.

The only faiths that currently, ICly, have a really strong case for being considered kill-on-site are Bane and Bhaal.

Loviatar is a non-issue in the current status of the server. She is a detestable deity with a cult-like following that hasn't caused much or any issue recently at all (like many other evil Gods, that aren't banned).

Myrkul? Absolutely not, unless a priest is caught red-handed raising the undead I cannot imagine how any Baldur's Gate court would ever dare to convict a Myrkulite of being a Myrkulite alone. It's the God of the Dead. How can that be banned? No Human settlement ever should be banning Myrkul. In lore, he's supposed to be the one God who's appearance anyone can clearly and accurately imagine if they try.

Shar? Well, it would be very hard to find someone that would admit as much, but in a city like Baldur's Gate, like any city, certainly she has a following. This isn't so much an issue because anyone that exposes themselves as a Sharran is either in a society that allows it (or has a strong influence from it) or has made an error.

Malar's mention on the list of banned faiths is odd but understandable, he's a nature Diety with attitude and it might be assumed that he does nothing but plague the hunters and gatherers of Baldur's Gate, unless they pay homage. Considering the Chauntean influence at the Gate I can kind of understand the problem here.

Talos is an odd one because his priesthood cause so much trouble and are widely reviled and banned almost everywhere, but I still cannot imagine a scenario where they can or should be killed on sight unless they are actively engaged in violent activities. His faithful are meant to be avoided at all costs, afaik.

Overall, I can't help but feel that an outright kill-on-sight rule for followers of these deities makes for terrible RP. For the following reasons:

1) "If you follow one of these gods, and are low level, you are much more likely to be PvPed than if you are epic level." This is an unfortunate problem with most PC conflicts where a player knows (either through Scry or being a regular and never having seen the new 'evil' PC before) that a conflicting character is lower level than them. Through experimentation I've played characters on either side of this spectrum- An evil character around lower level good characters and a low level evil character around higher level good characters and the only situation which consistently results in PvP is when the evil character is the lower level one.

You can have the most brilliantly RPed evil-God following character ever but if any random good PC comes along, according to the list of banned deities, you die and cannot reappear for 24 hours according to server rules, locking you out of RP. I object that this in the interest of good RP or even just good gamesmanship.

2) Some of the Gods on the list make for great and interesting character choices, and have potential for generating some really cool RP when played intelligently. Some, like the Banites, already have a home for that RP but many do not, to the point where it is an impossible handicap to play a faithful of that God on this server, and therefore detrimental to the server's RP.

Now, I don't necessarily suggest the list of banned dieties be amended. But I really do wish the DMs would make a ruling on whether they mean the "Worship" in Worship/Preaching of The Following Deities: is the verb or the noun. I've always been under the presumption that so long as a character was not preaching or performing any overt worship (rites, rituals) that you can't (ICly lawfully) kill a PC for claiming their patron is, say, Malar.

Of course, I imagine a Chaotic Good character would gladly hunt down as many members of certain faiths as they deem fit, but I really implore that there is some lawful repercussions for this. There is no reason why a LE follower of Bane and a CG follower of Corellon should not be serving in the same jail cell, so far as current IG interactions are anything to go by.

[Rasael]

I think two issues are being confused here. The law of Baldur's Gate specifies that worshipping and preaching to the mentioned Deities is forbidden. But the law also forbids people from murdering or accosting other people.

The punishment in either case is a matter decided by a magistrate, unless the accused is a noble. In that case the privileges of the nobility demand a trial by one's peers.

This means that you are committing a crime if you worhsip a deity on the banned list. If you are caught the magistrate will punish you for that crime according to the severity of the offense. If you were worshipping by yourself and have no history of violence and no suspicions are held against your character then it is unlikely the punishment would be heavy.

Likewise if you accost or murder someone, even if they were engaged in an illegal activity. The law provides for self-defense and the right to apprehend a criminal but it does not grant people the right to do violence. The city guard / flaming fist possess the exclusive right to use force. So by taking matters into your own hands you are also performing a criminal activity. If you accost or murder a person worshipping Myrkul then the punishment for that is liable to be far heavier than the punishment for that illegal worship. You would certainly risk a capital punishment if you have engaged in acts of unlawful violence before, and especially if you murdered other people before.

The line between apprehending a criminal as a civilian and using unlawful force is kind of vague. But initiating PvP will almost always qualify as picking a fight instead of employing self-defense. So in that case the character that is being challenged can rightfully plea his case before the authorities, assuming his own crimes are minor. If they are not minor then he can try to omit them and hope the other party won't be able to prove that they occurred. Because as long as the other party admits it tried to start a fight and can't prove it had a good reason to do so, that party loses and gets sentenced.

[Rakosi]

Thanks for the response Rasael; I suppose that was the underlying question!