The Recent Decree of the Dukes and Tyrran Lore

[Hidennka]

Hey guys, I originally tossed this to Arkanis to answer, but he suggested opening it up to the whole team for answers. I was wondering if I could pick your brain regarding the recent degree of the Dukes (regarding land under their protection/jurisdiction) and how a Tyrran might act/react to such.

Priests and Paladin of Tyr serve as judge, jury, and executioner in wilderness areas where there is no law but that of the sword. When doing so, their code cleaves fairly close to "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth," but does adhere to common trade custom leavened by "the mercy of ignorance." This last means that if a being is truly ignorant of the proper behavior, minor transgressions can be forgiven once with a warning, an explanation of the proper law—and a record of the warning being written down in the priest's Book of Lawgiving for later distribution to other Tyrrans so that the particular being will not be forgiven a second time.

In civilized areas, Tyrrans (inevitably called "tyrants" behind their backs by nonbelievers) become legal experts and serve as the lawyers of Faerûn by dispensing advice and "speaking for" accused persons in trials. The fees they charge go to the Church of Tyr.

Tyrrans often go about lecturing others on their shortcomings as to following laws, rules, and regulations, but they also serve to fearlessly take complaints about such formalities to the authorities who make such rules. No Tyrran will enforce a law that contradicts other laws or can be shown to be unjust. Note the concern is not that it is unfair, but unjust—defined in the Tyrran church as out of compliance with the principles and definitions adhered to by other laws in the body of legal doctrine of which it is a part. Paladin of Tyr also have the duty of delivering just vengeance as punishment on the part of those who cannot do it themselves. Tyrrans undertake formal missions to do this, making promises to those to be avenged and forcing open confrontations with those the vengeance is to be visited upon, rather than working behind the scenes or employing intrigue.

A few parts of the new decree leave me a little confused, so I just wanted to clear a few things up to make sure I don't step out of line anywhere.

Disputes and violence perpetrated outside of Flaming Fist oversight [read: no NPC Flaming Fist on the Map/Area], and in the lands of Tradeway between towns and cities, and in the lawless northern regions, as well in lands ruled over by autonomous entities or nation-states [read: Friendly Arm Inn, Candlekeep, Gullykin, Amn, Darkhold...], are under no lawful jurisdiction, or under private jurisdiction.

The Council of Four declares the current situation of the Tradeway south of of Wyrm's Crossing, to be thus: Baldur's Gate is in league, a friend, to Bentley and his wife, and their bold undertaking in providing a safe and secure Inn, for wayfarers upon the Tradeway. Though Bentley and Baldur's Gate have agreed to come to each others assistance in times of great need, Bentley operates his own guard force and upholds independent Laws within his guarded walls...and extending to the nearby fields that effect his business. Those Laws shall be posted outside his establishment. Violation of those Laws will be met by justice under Bentley himself, a famed wizard and true friend of this Council.

Does this effectively mean such places are now lawless (save for Amnian territory obviously) or merely subjected to their own laws and justice system. For example, someone caught practicing Necromancy in Beregost would obviously be taken to and judged by Antonio and/or the Countess, but places such as Candlekeep and the Tradeway nearby what would one do in these situations? Is there particular laws for these areas?

In regards to the Friendly Arm Inn, what would be the laws considered for this area as placed by Bentley? For example a "wanted" criminal in the area, or a scoundrel causing a disturbance outside the walls. What would be the correct procedure then when witnessing such acts, and as a Tyrran if such an act is not specifically mentioned or invoked by law would it be wrong to act then under the Court of Tyr as judge, jury and executioner?

Violence perpetrated in Ducal Lands in which Flaming Fist soldiers are present [read: Maps with Flaming Fist NPCs] is considered a violation of Ducal Law. Thus, unless combat is agreed upon in the tradition of the duel before by both parties [read: cannot use "Move away or die" as agreed upon means of lawful combat and following the Server PvP Rules], it is combat based in defiance of the Ducal Law to maintain lawfully protected peace. Those that force combat upon others that do protest it, are in violation, and subject to prison.

This one in particular, say someone has summoned undead in an NPC guarded transition (naughty naughty!) and you ask them to remove the creature and they refuse, you challenge them to a duel and they still refuse. . . what is to be done here? Judging by this law "Remove the creature or it will be slain and I shall have you turned over to the authorities by force" will not be the correct course of action as it may have once been, so does one simply walk away after the duel is refused? Take note of the person and their distinguishing features and notify the authorities (screenshots!) so that an arrest warrant might be obtained?

I'm sure I haven't put this into words very well.... Heh. Hopefully it will make sense as to what I'm getting at. Again, apologies for the wall of text.

[Rasael]

The core of the decree is a declaration of sovereignty, and a recognition of sovereignty. The Council of Baldur's Gate emphasizes their own claims on ducal lands, but explains that Bently is an independant authority around the Friendly Arms Inn.

The tradeway is explained as unclaimed land, save for whatever villages and outposts are found there.

What this means is that a magistrate in Baldur's Gate will not hold a trial for any things that occur outside of ducal lands. There is an exception however, in that the Dukes may still pay others to do something in those lands, or accept responsibility for things which happen there that affect their lands. In this sense you should think about bandits. The Flaming fist may patrol the tradeway and capture bandits, followed by a trial or execution in the city. And if you capture a criminal yourself you can bring him into custody of the city, should the magistrates consider his crimes connected to the prosperity of Baldur's Gate.

In terms of Tyrran law the first thing to ask yourself is who the authority on a given map is. If you have a legal issue, you take your complain there, not elsewhere. For bandits this will usually mean asking Bentley what to do. Bentley is likely to tell you to take them to Baldur's Gate though, because the Friendly Arms Inn does not possess a true prison and judicial system like the City. And it costs money to house prisoners, guard, and feed them.

The application of Tyrran justice as it is used in wilderness areas therefore depends on whether you are acting under the auspices of a certain authority. If you are on mission for a force in Baldur's Gate, like its Tyrran church, then you are bound by the City's law in so far as your mission is not seperate from its authority.

Hunting bandits on the trade way therefore does not mean Tyrran justice will be applied as in wilderness areas. Not unless you are no longer acting on behalf of the Tyrran church of Baldur's Gate to clear the trade way of bandits that threaten trade to the city. This is different if you are not acting as a charge of the Tyrran church of Baldur's Gate, or on behalf of another power in the city. If you are traveling for your own sake then you are free to dispense Tyrran wilderness justice. But in that case you may also choose to apply the laws of the City, because you may decide to act on church authority or city edicts.

This one in particular, say someone has summoned undead in an NPC guarded transition (naughty naughty!) and you ask them to remove the creature and they refuse, you challenge them to a duel and they still refuse. . . what is to be done here? Judging by this law "Remove the creature or it will be slain and I shall have you turned over to the authorities by force" will not be the correct course of action as it may have once been, so does one simply walk away after the duel is refused? Take note of the person and their distinguishing features and notify the authorities (screenshots!) so that an arrest warrant might be obtained?

From what I know about the roleplay-out rule in PvP situations it does not always mean the other player gets to run away. The roleplay out can also consist of token cooperation, for example paying a small 'toll' to bandits.

The trouble in your example is that you create a situation in which there is no clearly identifiable 'token' roleplay out. Because if the other player cooperates and goes along to the guards he is liable to spend more than a token amount of time (lets say 5 to 10 mintues) sorting out the consequences. He is liable to be tried as a necromancer, and possibly earn a perma-death strike for getting caught creating undead.

In such cases (where is no clearly identifiable exit) the roleplay-out rule means that you can choose to leave. To retreat as it were, without entering PvP. The server rules cover some of these situations however, through the so called Kill-on-Sight principle. If someone summons an undead creature in front of you the rules mark the summoner as killable on sight. Which means that if you take a screenshot of the summoning or the direct result plus a log entry, that you can freely attack. No roleplay out is needed.

In cases where you stumble upon a necromancer who already has a summon it depends on what is going on. If the Necromancer is visibly directing or cooperating with the undead (repeatedly fighting together) then you can suspect that he is its master. In that case you may, if you are certain you have all the evidence through screenshots, attack directly and consider the summoner kill-on-sight.

In other cases you must give a roleplay out, by making clear for example that you will attack the undead the creature but not the other person. (the summoner, but your character doesn't know or suspect that). The roleplay out in that case is to let you attack the undead summon. The summoner may also choose to enter PvP, by denying you the attack on the undead creature and thus entering into the confrontation because he will protect it.