Remove ads

A Sword Without a Hilt: A Song of Ice and Fire/D&D 3.5 Crossover

Reader mode
DragonParadox said:
  1. No, since that was actually a direct sacrifice to another god. Yss 'claim' for lack of a better word is much better
  2. Aspects do not tend to have individual names, they are not servants of the gods but fragments of their power that can be split off and reabsorbed at will
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Lesson learned, then. Clerics of Tiamat are marked for sacrifice rather than simply being killed in battle.

Accidentally empowering Tiamat would be very embarrassing.

@DragonParadox, how does this work with those drakes? Would killing them empower Tiamat?
 
@Snowfire, thank you. I will have to think about your reasoning for a moment and yeah, your aid in going over the vote would be appreciated. But I kinda want to definitely write it myself.

I've always boasted "give me 10 minutes debating theology with the Reds and they are dancing to our tune".
So I feel I need to finish this myself.
 
Azel said:
@Snowfire, thank you. I will have to think about your reasoning for a moment and yeah, your aid in going over the vote would be appreciated. But I kinda want to definitely write it myself.

I've always boasted "give me 10 minutes debating theology with the Reds and they are dancing to our tune".
So I feel I need to finish this myself.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Completely understand. It's like how I was with Rhaella on the way South. Ping me when your plan is done?
 
egoo said:
I'm sorely tempted.
About 30% of my problem with her character would be aleviated if she turns concept cleric under our guidance.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

You misunderstand. Attempting to turn her to apostasy will probably bring this straight to fight territory, and wasting a resource like this would be...wait for it...

Inefficient.
 
zxzx24 said:
The world is inherently unreasonable.

People can be reasonable, and that is all.

And we'll... Precious little I have heard from "rationalists" and others who champion reason and logic above all else had convinced me theirs is the grander vision for the world.

It feels... It feels like just trading out the old fanaticism for the new.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The world is entirely reasonable or neutral depending on your perspective, it is thinking minds that are unreasonable.

DragonParadox said:
"Are you certain about that?" Lya asks unexpectedly. "Were I to lay out before you all the lore of the soul that I have gathered, would you upon learning it all still say it was the doing of one god who made us all, the whole world, and all the Spheres that turn beyond this one?"

"Were I to doubt it it would be either a failing of my ability to conceive the mind of R'hllor or my faith." A smile touches her lips that on another you would have called self-depreciating. "I freely admit that I like any man or woman might some day suffer from the first, and I most certainly share the second flaw for I am but mortal."
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

A "rationalist or champion of reason and logic" is only such if they are willing to grapple with evidence, nobody and nothing knows what is absolutely correct but to claim it unbendingly, to deny evidence not as incorrect, or on an individual basis, but irrelevant by it's very nature is disgusting and dangerous.
 
Snowfire said:
I'm pretty sure we don't want to. Mel is too potentially useful if we can turn her, and not just for how she can help us reform the faith of the Red God.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
She would be useful either way.
Her sharing her new understanding would help us against the red faith as well.

And anyway, her political impact fades besides the chance of getting a PC that is a serious threat to Viserys.
You can count those native to the Material who can claim that on one hand.

Infinitly rarer than tricky theologicans and fiery preachers, we can get those on our side rather easily, as just seen in Volantis.
 
Last edited:
Snowfire said:
Inefficient.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
You of all the people don't get to play this card, mister Mc-don't-use-Rhaella-to-100%-of-her-abilities.
:p

And I'm not sure if that would be a fight.
Kinda depends to how hard we push her into apostacy, and if Burny actually turns his attention here.
So, about 2 rolls we have to be lucky on :/
 
Last edited:
Another out there option for at least reconciling Melisandre with the Old Gods. Reveal that they're a hive mind of mortals (and fey) who's main purpose is to serve against the Others. I'm not sure if this fact is even like top super secret? Frame it as mortals wanting to go the extra step of fighting the Enemy and of course the fact that it's worked proves the hand of R'hlorr was present in this endeavor! And it's not like the OG really care if they're demoted by this view so long as the sacrifices come and the heart trees prosper
 
I for one would like to point out that Apostate Mel is, at best, the loss of a high-level Cleric for R'hllor. Annoying, but no more.

Faithful Zealot Mel, following a advantageous heresy on the other hand? That's how you fight gods. Turn them against themselves, just like we did with Melissandres words.
 
Deliste said:
The world is entirely reasonable or neutral depending on your perspective, it is thinking minds that are unreasonable.



A "rationalist or champion of reason and logic" is only such if they are willing to grapple with evidence, nobody and nothing knows what is absolutely correct but to claim it unbendingly, to deny evidence not as incorrect, or on an individual basis, but irrelevant by it's very nature is disgusting and dangerous.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The very fact of the matter is your vehemence functions very similarly to blind zealotry in that it immediately dismisses any value the beliefs another individual holds, neither trying to help that person make informed decisions based on the beliefs of others, or come to understand what they actually hold to be true based on the fact that they are taking something on faith. You will often find cases where someone claims something based on faith, and yet holds these opinions in such a way that they willingly engage with others and they are flexible enough that they are not so brittle in the face of theological debate (which is what debates on matter of science, reason and logic end up being so often).

You claim a high ground, but divorce it from morals. But saying that they should immediately stand upon ethics and "not what sky man looking upon them from above says" is problematic in a different way.

I think Azel said it cleanest and best though.

Tolerance is a two way street. If you don't practice it either, you're part of the problem.
 
Azel said:
I for one would like to point out that Apostate Mel is, at best, the loss of a high-level Cleric for R'hllor. Annoying, but no more.

Faithful Zealot Mel, following a advantageous heresy on the other hand? That's how you fight gods. Turn them against themselves, just like we did with Melissandres words.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I understand that.

But getting Melisandre as one of our PCs is still better for us, even if it hurts Burny less.

And that's slightly more likely on the former path.
 
Last edited:
Azel said:
Annoying, but no more.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I don't hear you over the sounds of us infringing immediate damage on Burny by taking away one of the most powerful casters on the plane, and ideally making her our PC :V

Seriously though, even if we are heresy-fying her, eventually I want to turn her concept cleric.
That's basically the only way I would be capable of standing her character.
R'hlor fanatical allegiance on top of all else just takes it too far :/
 
Deliste said:
The world is entirely reasonable or neutral depending on your perspective, it is thinking minds that are unreasonable.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Ah, but you must see. Thinking minds are part of the world no?

Deliste said:
A "rationalist or champion of reason and logic" is only such if they are willing to grapple with evidence, nobody and nothing knows what is absolutely correct but to claim it unbendingly, to deny evidence not as incorrect, or on an individual basis, but irrelevant by it's very nature is disgusting and dangerous.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

"Stand for nothing, fall for everything."

The central conceit is not arguing against evidence, but arguing for the worth of belief even lacking evidence.

I do not believe in God.
I do not believe in Magic.
I do not believe I can become president, or that I could walk on the moon.
I do not believe in Love. Or hope. Or honesty. Or Justice. Or Math.

These... lies are things we tell our self to make life easier. To make life more bearable, because they are useful.

I chose to believe humanity is good.
I chose to put my trust in others knowing the risks.
I chose to walk over the edge of the cliff knowing there was nothing there to catch me.
I chose to believe life is worth living, despite knowing it is not, because I couldn't live a meaningless existence.

If you can, I am happy for you. I do not feel like I should be called the devil for wanting to love being alive however.
 
Last edited:
DragonParadox said:
Yes the gods are limited from acting directly in the world, though in Tiamat's case it is not only that taking something from her demands and of course allows vengeance. It's also that killing someone sworn to Tiamat counts in some ways as a sacrifice in her name.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Does her history with Planetos matter, too?
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top