# Knights of the Virgin



## Hunter99 (Jul 8, 2011)

*Mod Note*: Ladies and Gentlemen, we'd not had threads like this in the past, so we never needed a policy to handle them.  In the wake of this, we've discussed and implemented a new policy, to make our position on the matter clear.  ~Umbran, EN World Moderator

http://www.enworld.org/forum/meta/3...g-molestation-rape-other-such-discussion.html


These are the villains in a tentative campaign which I am thinking of running.

Tell me what you think.

Some men wish that things be presented in a clear-cut fashion to them; that difficult choices either not be made at all or made by someone else. Such men seek to avoid the responsibility of thinking, which is a desire to avoid the responsibility of freedom. Dear reader, you have become acquainted with the Knights of the Scarlet Woman. You may have been repulsed and sought refuge in the opposite of those knights in the hopes that they would be better, but the enemy of an evil is not necessarily a good. It can be another evil. History teaches us that evil does not manifest itself openly, that the evil that is done in this world is often done in the name of so-called goodness. (since there are those who disagree with the princinples of chastity, duty, altruism etc.) I am here to tell you about one such organization that does evil in the name of alleged goodness which you should already know a few things about: the Knights of the Virgin.

These knights are the worshippers of the ideals of duty, self-sacrifice, altruism and selflessness. They see themselves as noble crusaders for good. They believe that they are led by a commander, X, (left unnamed for now) who has been sent to them from the Deity to lead them to a better tomorrow. Believing their commander to be mystically enlightened, they have sworn an oath of unconditional obedience to him. They see themselves as the chosen and all who disagree as the damned. They are supporters of a conservative social order which recognizes the proper rank and place of everyone: the priest, the aristocrat, the knight, the man, the woman etc. They oppose all secular and dissenting ideas, which to them represent the work of the devil in men’s hearts.

The knights make entry open to all, and in fact support the drafting of all able-bodied men. They see it as the duty of every able-bodied man to fight for the holy cause which they have undertaken. The knights also support the conscription of women for breeding purposes to produce soldiers for the armies of righteousness. Their mentality manifests itself in what they consider to be wisdom. For instance, their motto is “Obedience and duty; our lives belong to the state.” One of their most revered sages has said “In childhood a woman should be dependent on her father, in youth on her husband, in old age on her children; a woman should never be independent.” Another of their mottos is, “A woman, like a walnut tree, should be beaten every day.” And if you were wondering, yes, they punish adulterers with death, as they do to homosexuals and those convicted of dissent.

Those who are members of the organization receive a set of armor with the emblems of the order. The symbol of the order is an arm holding a sword with a crown dangling from the arm like a bracelet. Members are highly respected in areas where the knights holds sway. Higher ranking members get to indulge in “aristocratic pleasures” denied to the common masses. Adventurers receive payment for any missions they do on behalf of the order. (It is possible for such adventurers to be drafted, which is sad, but is an unfortunate reality.)

The knights are allied with certain celestial beings, certain churches and the aristocracy. Their sworn enemies are those dedicated to pagan ideals. Among these are the chief enemy of the knighthood, the Knights of the Scarlet Woman, while allies of the K.S.W. are also considered enemies. The Knights of the Virgin have been commanded to kill any K.S.W. members on sight and attack if they see anyone wearing the emblems of the enemy order. That is of course, if the knight is not high-ranking, in which case they are ordered to capture such knights and send them to the headquarters of the order to be tortured and interrogated. The Knights of the Virgin believe in honor and do not use trickery to win battles. All members have a duty to lay down their lives for the state, as the state is considered a living, breathing entity who is the Deity’s representative on earth.

The commander of the knights is appointed by the head priest who receives a vision from the deity as to the right man to lead the righteous to glorious victory. There is a military hierarchy and there is no civilian control of the military in the areas where the knighthood holds sway. The order is popular in conservative areas but shunned like the plague in pagan, secular, and liberal areas.

Sometimes reality is grim and presents men with difficult choices. This is one such choice. In a world where neither side can be called good, which will you choose, dear reader?


----------



## Dandu (Jul 8, 2011)

How horribly repressive! Codpieces should be burned! Chastity belts should be unlocked! Rampant orgies should ensue! Experimentation should commence*! Yay sex!

*But no gays.


----------



## domino (Jul 8, 2011)

Hunter99 said:


> Sometimes reality is grim and presents men with difficult choices. This is one such choice. In a world where neither side can be called good, which will you choose, dear reader?



These guys.


----------



## Dandu (Jul 8, 2011)

Eh. Both monasteries are equally flammable in my opinion.


----------



## domino (Jul 8, 2011)

But let's face it, the reason these guys are so bad is because he needs someone to make the knights of the rapine brainwashers look good.


----------



## Hunter99 (Jul 8, 2011)

Dandu said:


> How horribly repressive! Codpieces should be burned! Chastity belts should be unlocked! Rampant orgies should ensue! Experimentation should commence*! Yay sex!
> 
> *But no gays.




This deserves xp. Great sense of humor.

Domino, you may say that is the reason why I am doing such a thing but a glance at history will show that pagan and religious cultures have existed in the past which were at war with one another.

Anyways, this is my campaign which I am planning. I will make the villains look however I want them to look. Even if you disapprove of them because you think I am misrepresenting savagery.


----------



## StreamOfTheSky (Jul 8, 2011)

Hunter99 said:


> Dear reader, you have become acquainted with the Knights of the Scarlet Woman. You may have been repulsed and sought refuge in the opposite of those knights...






Hunter99 said:


> Tell me what you think.




I think Aristotle had something to say relevant to this.


----------



## Hunter99 (Jul 8, 2011)

If you are talking about his golden mean, you should remember that the mean between two evils is not a good.

And that between good and evil (although I am not saying the Knights of the Scarlet Woman are good) there can be no golden mean. (Which is something Aristotle also pointed out.)


----------



## StreamOfTheSky (Jul 8, 2011)

Hunter99 said:


> If you are talking about his golden mean, you should remember that the mean between two evils is not a good.
> 
> And that between good and evil (although I am not saying the Knights of the Scarlet Woman are good) there can be no golden mean. (Which is something Aristotle also pointed out.)




More like a mean between deficiency and excess.  Again, just seemed incredibly relevant here.  Anyone who thinks the solution to an appaling excess is to go completely to the other extreme (or vice-versa) has a serious problem with ethical reasoning.


----------



## Hunter99 (Jul 8, 2011)

I agree with Aristotle's idea of a golden mean, but when it is a question of moral principles, there can be no compromise.

For instance, if one side represented individual rights and the other side represented the subordination of the individual to the group to seek a middle position is equivalent to surrendering to evil. It is, in fact, surrendering to evil.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jul 8, 2011)

This, combined with the KSW thread, has given me a tropical island's worth of facepalms.

Altruism is one of their highest virtues...except when it comes to killing people for dissent, homosexuality, or adultery, or when conscripting women for breeding purposes.  (Yes, I know RW religions have exhibited such dissonant dichotomies- I'm a practicing member of one...)

Related side-question: how is their "conscription" morally different from that of the KSW?

Given a choice between these two "Knightly" orders, I'd choose neither.  Heck, I may just seek to found my own Knightly order, dedicated to eradicating both of these.

In all honesty, this doesn't sound like a D&D campaign to me.  I mean, usually, campaigns give you contrasts in light and dark, not dark and darker.  Even the darkest D&D campaigns usually have SOMEONE who is a true beacon of virtue, even if they are doomed to fail.  And even so, D&D bucked trends of sexism (less so in the earliest editions) to make female characters every bit as playable and viable and interesting as the more traditional fantasy heroes of manlier than manly men.  In this world of yours, there is no beacon of virtue...and women seemingly have no value beyond being breeders or sex puppets.  Again, this doesn't sound like D&D at all.

F.A.T.A.L., OTOH, seems like it would be a natural fit.


----------



## Elf Witch (Jul 8, 2011)

I can see having evil groups like this in a campaign what I don't get is not having a third group made of people who want to see both pf these groups dead.

I also would not want to play in a game where you get two choices to role play out the subjugation or woman. One by forced rape and the other by forced breeding.


----------



## Hunter99 (Jul 8, 2011)

The purpose of this campaign is to create a conflict of values.

If the choices were easy, there would be no conflict of values.

It is only when the campaign presents such difficult choices that a real conflict of values is created in the minds of the players.

Hence why I chose to create this tentative campaign in this manner.

Edit: You are not required to role-play out either of the two, but this doesn't mean that man is never presented with difficult choices.

It is up to the players how they respond to this situation. Perhaps they can act like the man in Schindler's list and try to save as many women as possible. They could also become renunciates and preach non-violence like Buddha. There are many possibilites as to what the players can do.

Edit: They can also act like the men in Valkyrie with Tom Cruise and try to bring down one of these orders from within.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jul 8, 2011)

Hunter99 said:


> Sometimes reality is grim and presents men with difficult choices. This is one such choice. In a world where neither side can be called good, which will you choose, dear reader?



Scandalous!  And therefore I choose... _neither!_





_Viva la Revolucion! _


----------



## Dandu (Jul 8, 2011)

No compromise. Not even in the face of Armageddon.



> Given a choice between these two "Knightly" orders, I'd choose neither.   Heck, I may just seek to found my own Knightly order, dedicated to  eradicating both of these.



I really should write up a summary for the Devil Dogs instead of forcing people to read through the novella.


----------



## Elf Witch (Jul 8, 2011)

Why is it when anyone does stuff like this in a game it usually involves the subjugation of woman? I would like to see just once this done to male NPCs.

I know very well that woman were subjugated and are still be subjugated in our world. 

But in DnD rules woman can be just as strong as men. There is also magic I would really like to see some man try and control a female sorcerer who can turn invisible, fly and rain fireballs from the sky on him.

Woman can be clerics and get the same power from the deity as a male character and what about druids they get their power from nature.

I just find it hard to believe that the fate of woman would be the same as it is here. Unless of course you hit them with strength modifiers, say the the gods want to see them subjugated and that woman bodies can't do magic of any kind.


----------



## Dandu (Jul 8, 2011)

> There is also magic I would really like to see some man try and control a  female sorcerer who can turn invisible, fly and rain fireballs from the  sky on him.



Maybe if he was a monk and specialized in grappling people.


----------



## Hunter99 (Jul 8, 2011)

Yes, but how many sorcerers, clerics and druid are there?

The majority of people in D&D are commoners and experts.

And if a few powerful women wanted to create trouble, how long do you think they could last since every society/organization would be against them. (or at least the majority.)


----------



## Elf Witch (Jul 8, 2011)

Dandu said:


> Maybe if he was a monk and specialized in grappling people.




And he the monk didn't have to worry about the raging female barbarian hitting him with a great axe.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jul 8, 2011)

This post brought to you by:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OnxkfLe4G74]YouTube - ‪Freewill - Rush‬‏[/ame]



> The purpose of this campaign is to create a conflict of values.




You haven't set that up, at least not yet.  You've set up a conflict between two repugnant, oppressive, misogynistic religious orders.  The only choice I can see the PCs struggling which is over prioritizing which of the two to go after.

So...we've seen your devils and your demons.  What next?



> And if a few powerful women wanted to create trouble, how long do you think they could last since every society/organization would be against them. (or at least the majority.)




What is it with you and woman hating?

The MAJORITY of society and organizations in your world believing either the KSW or the KV are justified & right in their treatment of women?


----------



## anest1s (Jul 8, 2011)

To tell the truth, I like both organizations. They are so insulting and evil, that I think that it is realistic for humans to think like that. In my campaign I enjoy having the PCs between the evil, the eviler, and the sick evil- both of those two organizations are SO sick evil. I would let their members to be paladins (actually blackguards advertised as paladins) just to make the PCs wonder wtf is going on. Also almost every commoner, if asked would support one over the other 

The only thing that would worry me, is that maybe the players will think that I think in real life that one of them is good/but no real risk- I know them for years.

As a PC, I would join for the free armor, then I would tell them that I will join the opposite side as a spy, then join the opposite side, get an armor from there too, then go chaotic and make an organization against both. Maybe one equally sick evil, just for the lulz (Slave Knights of the Female Queens anyone? Male members castrated)

edit: And I would force them to join of course.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jul 8, 2011)

Elf Witch said:


> Why is it when anyone does stuff like this in a game it usually involves the subjugation of woman? I would like to see just once this done to male NPCs.
> 
> I know very well that woman were subjugated and are still be subjugated in our world.
> 
> ...



I think you've hit the nail on the head.  In D&D women and men are physically and socially equivalent in the rules, but for some reason some gamers like to keep playing up the realworld  inequalities, regardless of how utterly illogical it is in the context of the game mechanics.  

(In all fairness, though, surely someone somewhere has played the Amazon setting?  Though of course that usually just swaps extant M/F disparities in the realworld; that is, it just slaps boobs on real world male stereotypes, and makes men effeminate.)

That said, playing the roles of women in the campaign Hunter99 has outlined, with the understood goal of bringing down that world's order through a combination of physical prowess, subversion, altruism, individualism, liberty, and all the other things these Orders apparently revile... now that could be an interesting game.

Assuming, of course, the subjugation, violation and rapey shinola is played way, way, way down by the GM.


----------



## Aus_Snow (Jul 8, 2011)

Hunter99 said:


> Yes, but how many sorcerers, clerics and druid are there?
> 
> The majority of people in D&D are commoners and experts.
> 
> And if a few powerful women wanted to create trouble, how long do you think they could last since every society/organization would be against them. (or at least the majority.)



And, guided only by counter-intuitive unconscious* assumptions...

A tropical island indeed. Picturesque, even.


* Er, I hope.


----------



## Elf Witch (Jul 8, 2011)

Hunter99 said:


> Yes, but how many sorcerers, clerics and druid are there?
> 
> The majority of people in D&D are commoners and experts.
> 
> And if a few powerful women wanted to create trouble, how long do you think they could last since every society/organization would be against them. (or at least the majority.)




Are the gods against them as well? Because unless they are then right there you have an issue. Unless of course there are no good clerics in your game world. No good god would allow this to happen and if a cleric follower did these things they would lose their access to spells. 

What about nature? A group of female and like minded males could give these socialites a hard time.

The reason why woman were able to be subjugated here on earth is two fold. The majority of woman are not as strong as men and can be easily overpowered and two Because woman have children and for the most part birth control was not that reliable then they were dependent on men to protect them and their offspring.

I take it you want reliable birth control in your world so there goes that one and unless you choose to make all woman weaker then men there goes the other.

And as you point out most people in DnD are commoners or experts all it would take would to give these guys a bad day is a good cleric, wizard, druid, fighter. A paladin with his smite ability would give these knights a bad time.


----------



## Dandu (Jul 8, 2011)

Hunter99 said:


> Yes, but how many sorcerers, clerics and druid are there?



Enough.



> The majority of people in D&D are commoners and experts.



Don't knock experts. They're pretty scary.



> And if a few powerful women wanted to create trouble, how long do you think they could last since every society/organization would be against them. (or at least the majority.)



Set up a game and we'll see.

I've got my PC right here.


----------



## anest1s (Jul 8, 2011)

Dandu said:


> Set up a game and we'll see.
> 
> I've got my PC right here.




Hell, I would join too! Even though I don't usually play on forums


----------



## Hunter99 (Jul 8, 2011)

One point that needs to be brought up is that many responders talk about how they would bring down this order by starting their own knighthood etc. It seems to imply that the road will be full of roses. (Not necessarily what the responders were intending)

If the world that these PCs are living is this dark, it should be remembered that the effort to bring these orders down will be difficult and the possibility of their perishing in the effort is real.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jul 8, 2011)

> Are the gods against them as well? Because unless they are then right there you have an issue. Unless of course there are no good clerics in your game world. No good god would allow this to happen and if a cleric follower did these things they would lose their access to spells.




All it would take would be one pissed off goddess of Love, the Hearth, or what have you.

Hera would go on a rampage (using Zeus' parts as a bludgeon if she had to) to scour the lands of these jokers where her worshipers dwelt.

In any given FRPG, magic is kind of like a Colt .45 Peacemaker...The Great Equalizer.  Unless males have a monopoly on the divine AND the arcane, some of those "troublemaking" females will make a lot of trouble indeed.


----------



## Dandu (Jul 8, 2011)

Hunter99 said:


> If the world that these PCs are living is this dark, it should be remembered that the effort to bring these orders down will be difficult and the possibility of their perishing in the effort is real.



_All the darkness in the world cannot extinguish the light of a single candle._
-St. Francis of Assisi


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jul 8, 2011)

Hunter99 said:


> And if a few powerful women wanted to create trouble, how long do you think they could last since every society/organization would be against them. (or at least the majority.)



Actually, now you have me wondering if women should even be playing D&D at all.


----------



## Elf Witch (Jul 8, 2011)

Theo R Cwithin said:


> I think you've hit the nail on the head.  In D&D women and men are physically and socially equivalent in the rules, but for some reason some gamers like to keep playing up the realworld  inequalities, regardless of how utterly illogical it is in the context of the game mechanics.
> 
> (In all fairness, though, surely someone somewhere has played the Amazon setting?  Though of course that usually just swaps extant M/F disparities in the realworld; that is, it just slaps boobs on real world male stereotypes, and makes men effeminate.)
> 
> ...




I think both of these groups make for good bad guys and I can see a fun campaign built around trying to bring them down. 

Some how though I have the feeling that the Knights of the Virgin are really supposed to be the bad guys and the Knights of the Scarlet Woman are his ideal. I think he is only giving lip service to them being evil.

I have Amazons in my setting and they don't subjugate men like this. They have a pact with a group of male Artemis worshipers. Once a year they have a feast and orgy for the purpose of procreation. Male babies are given to the men to raise and females become Amazons.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jul 8, 2011)

Hunter99 said:


> One point that needs to be brought up is that many responders talk about how they would bring down this order by starting their own knighthood etc. It seems to imply that the road will be full of roses. (Not necessarily what the responders were intending)
> 
> If the world that these PCs are living is this dark, it should be remembered that the effort to bring these orders down will be difficult and the possibility of their perishing in the effort is real.



Of course it would be difficult, but it's the route I suspect most sane, well-adjusted gamers would take.  Indeed, it's the route I suspect most sane, well-adjusted gamers would expect the GM assumed they would take.  (If that makes sense.)


----------



## Hunter99 (Jul 8, 2011)

I was planning to have this campaign take place in Eberron where gods don't walk the earth since I think it is more realistic for them not to.

Dandu, your sorcerer may be powerful, but that is one person.

This doesn't mean that every area in the world is enlightened, or that women are even allowed opportunities for advancement in some areas.

On the whole, women are going to be to some extent disadvantaged in my campaign. (not mechanics-wise, just story-wise.)

Although I was planning on having a number of independent and high ranking women in the K.S.W.

Edit: I also don't think physically powerful women are realistic hence it is possible that I have women use the dexterity stat instead of strength when they decide to become fighters.

Edit: Sexism is bad, but we should not forget the historical position of women and try to evade it.


----------



## Dandu (Jul 8, 2011)

> Dandu, your sorcerer may be powerful, but that is one person.



So was Simo Hayha.


----------



## anest1s (Jul 8, 2011)

Hunter99 said:


> Dandu, your sorcerer may be powerful, but that is one person.




But she has a dream



Hunter99 said:


> Although I was planning on having a number of independent and high ranking women in the K.S.W.




So why not have high ranking woman in this one too?


----------



## Hunter99 (Jul 8, 2011)

In this organization, women's rank depends on the number of children they have produced.

They receive medals for such achievements.

It is not consistent with their principles and premises to have independent women as members or to allow such women to exist.

Also, I fully support women playing D&D. D&D is like theater, both men and women can play and derive enjoyment from the game. (Since The Orc Within brought it up.)

Edit: By the way, that is a beautiful quote Dandu.


----------



## StreamOfTheSky (Jul 8, 2011)

Dandu said:


> So was Simo Hayha.




And... that's like the third thing this week I've wanted to +xp you for, but couldn't.


----------



## anest1s (Jul 8, 2011)

Hunter99 said:


> In this organization, women's rank depends on the number of children they have produced.
> 
> They receive medals for such achievements.




This shouts ''weaklings''. In my organization, the more Scarlet/Virgin Knights heads you have, the higher your position. We also have a male hunt every Saturday, and mass tortures/castration for our catch every Sunday.


----------



## Dandu (Jul 8, 2011)

Fool! For every one you cut off, two grow back in its place!

Or am I thinking of hydras?


----------



## anest1s (Jul 8, 2011)

Dandu said:


> Fool! For every one you cut off, two grow back in its place!
> 
> Or am I thinking of hydras?




My original plan was to capture torture and enslave them after I break their minds, while offering their wifes the freedom of choice to either join my cause or die (so I will have my ranks to grow somewhat too) - but you are right, I will give command to use fire after we cut them.


----------



## StreamOfTheSky (Jul 8, 2011)

Clearly the only moral course of action is to just kill every single person.  If they're not alive, they're either dead (and thus an object) or undead, and thus immune to all forms of mind control!  You can't force someone to do something against his or her will if s/he has no will.

I'm hereby starting the "Knights of the Skull."  Join me, and never know the feeling of doing something you dislike, or the feeling of dislike itself for that matter, ever again!


----------



## Dandu (Jul 8, 2011)

I've got the perfect mascot.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jul 8, 2011)

> On the whole, women are going to be to some extent disadvantaged in my campaign. (not mechanics-wise, just story-wise.)
> 
> Although I was planning on having a number of independent and high ranking women in the K.S.W.
> 
> ...




Yup- this is sounding more and more like a perfect campaign for F.A.T.A.L.

I'm now up to my second tropical isle of facepalms.



> I fully support women playing D&D.




Are there any in your group?


----------



## Hunter99 (Jul 8, 2011)

StreamOfTheSky said:


> Clearly the only moral course of action is to just kill every single person. If they're not alive, they're either dead (and thus an object) or undead, and thus immune to all forms of mind control! You can't force someone to do something against his or her will if s/he has no will.
> 
> I'm hereby starting the "Knights of the Skull." Join me, and never know the feeling of doing something you dislike, or the feeling of dislike itself for that matter, ever again!




Yes, but think of all the things you would miss out on. Sex, orgies, love, romance, all these things you would have to give up by becoming undead. (Unless you're into having sex with the undead.)

As far as there being women in my group, I play online so I don't know if the persons I play with are men or women.


----------



## Dandu (Jul 8, 2011)

> Edit: I also don't think physically powerful women are realistic hence  it is possible that I have women use the dexterity stat instead of  strength when they decide to become fighters.



There is an entire school of kung fu named after a girl.


----------



## Hunter99 (Jul 8, 2011)

Yes, but I doubt the woman beat the man because she was physically stronger than him.

Edit: Someone was asking me whether there are any good persons/organizations in this world. I was thinking of creating a non-violent order of monks, (not the class.) which would be weak and incapable of rendering opposition to the two dominant orders but would also not be engaging in any of the evil activities which these two knighthoods are engaging in. (modelled after buddhist monks.)

They would most likely exist in the lands controlled by the K.S.W. since they are the only one's who are tolerant and would not treat the monks as heretics.


----------



## Dandu (Jul 8, 2011)

> Yes, but I doubt the woman beat the man because she was physically stronger than him.



And you are basing that on...?

Seriously, people don't


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jul 8, 2011)

StreamOfTheSky said:


> Clearly the only moral course of action is to just kill every single person.  If they're not alive, they're either dead (and thus an object) or undead, and thus immune to all forms of mind control!  You can't force someone to do something against his or her will if s/he has no will.
> 
> I'm hereby starting the "Knights of the Skull."  Join me, and never know the feeling of doing something you dislike, or the feeling of dislike itself for that matter, ever again!




Nah, not kill everyone- just the men.  They kill the women too, of course, but _THEY_ get brought back as sentient undead.

In classic "to save the village, we destroyed the village" logic, they save women from being baby-making factories or being raped and being a part of the organization with their rapists by making them into a fighting force of revenants.  That'll show 'em!


----------



## Hunter99 (Jul 8, 2011)

I would assume, Dandu, that a woman who beat a man in martial arts was not a 300-lb gorilla since the majority of women are not 300-lb gorillas.


----------



## Jimlock (Jul 8, 2011)

If I ever played in such a campaign, I'd play an evil character with high social skills.

First thing I would do, would be to bring together the two knightly orders and explain to them how they are not different... how they are actually one and the same (The DCs to convince them would be fairly low actually).

The punch line would be:

"I do not understand why we cannot altogether profit? Why cannot we use women both for breeding and orgies/rapes?"

The heads of both orders would look at each other stupidly, and they would suddenly realize the truth of my words.

Then I'd rule both orders. They certainly wouldn't deny me leadership. Not to the single man who made them turn away from their petty differences.


...naaah.... that campaign is too easy....


----------



## Dandu (Jul 8, 2011)

> I would assume, Dandu, that a woman who beat a man in martial arts was  not a 300-lb gorilla since the majority of women are not 300-lb  gorillas.



Are only 300 lb gorillas capable of beating men in martial arts?


----------



## Elf Witch (Jul 8, 2011)

Hunter99 said:


> Edit: I also don't think physically powerful women are realistic hence it is possible that I have women use the dexterity stat instead of strength when they decide to become fighters.
> 
> Edit: Sexism is bad, but we should not forget the historical position of women and try to evade it.




I don't think throwing magic around and bringing people back from the dead is realistic yet some how I manage to deal with it in game.

And if you let them use dex to fight with and their dex skill gives them the same to hit and damage as a male using str then they still have a good chance of kicking butt and taking names.

Bigotry is bad to and we should not forget the historical positions of blacks and try to evade it.

I just have to wonder what you would think if someone made a game like yours but instead of using woman as second class citizens they used blacks. I wonder then if you might possible see just how offensive some people are finding this.


----------



## Hunter99 (Jul 8, 2011)

Of course not Dandu.

Jimlock, your attitude as to what these two orders would do seems to be very unrealistic.

One is a pagan, secular, liberal knighthood. The other is a religious, conservative knighthood.

The possibility of their ever allying is nil.

Edit: I am sorry Miss, if you are offended by the fact that life is unfair, but that is how things are.


----------



## Dandu (Jul 8, 2011)

Hunter99 said:


> Of course not Dandu.



So... what's the problem with believing a guy got his ass kicked by a girl?


----------



## Hunter99 (Jul 8, 2011)

I'm not saying he didn't.

I'm simply saying that if she kicked his ass, it was not because of physical strength.


----------



## anest1s (Jul 8, 2011)

Elf Witch said:


> I don't think throwing magic around and bringing people back from the dead is realistic yet some how I manage to deal with it in game.



 Why to assume he is even right? Many civilizations were matriarchic.



Elf Witch said:


> And if you let them use dex to fight with and their dex skill gives them the same to hit and damage as a male using str then they still have a good chance of kicking butt and taking names.




Last time I checked males and females had the same ability arrays.



Elf Witch said:


> I just have to wonder what you would think if someone made a game like yours but instead of using woman as second class citizens they used blacks. I wonder then if you might possible see just how offensive some people are finding this.




Here you are wrong. It isn't the fact that its evil that makes it offensive- its the fact that its assumed not to be


----------



## Dandu (Jul 8, 2011)

Hunter99 said:


> I'm not saying he didn't.
> 
> I'm simply saying that if she kicked his ass, it was not because of physical strength.



  Because it is impossible for women to be stronger than men in any circumstance?


----------



## Jimlock (Jul 8, 2011)

Hunter99 said:


> Jimlock, your attitude as to what these two orders would do seems to be very unrealistic.
> 
> One is a pagan, secular, liberal knighthood. The other is a religious, conservative knighthood.
> 
> The possibility of their ever allying is nil.




Obviously we disagree 

ohh... one other thing:

"liberal knighthood" is a paradox.


----------



## Elf Witch (Jul 8, 2011)

Hunter99 said:


> Of course not Dandu.
> 
> Jimlock, your attitude as to what these two orders would do seems to be very unrealistic.
> 
> ...




How is the one set of Knights pagan? I can buy the secular part but what of their practices and religious beliefs are based on any form of paganism?

And I really don't get the remark about life not being fair. We are not talking about life here we are talking about a game.

So are you saying that it is okay in a game to have different sets of rules for males and females that make the female character weaker and never as good as a male character?

If you want to take away something from a character then you balance it by giving them abilities in something else. That is good game design.


----------



## Hunter99 (Jul 8, 2011)

I thought their paganism would be obvious since Aphrodite is the greek goddess of love. (By paganism I don't mean the paganism of today. I mean that they follow the pagan maxim "eat, drink and be merry.")

As far as how life being unfair relates to D&D, if women were made physically equal and we pretended that in this fantasy world they had always had rights and everthing went as they wished, it would not be realistic. Consequently, it would be a bad story.


----------



## Elf Witch (Jul 8, 2011)

anest1s said:


> Why to assume he is even right? Many civilizations were matriarchic.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




He was the one who said that he was considering letting female PC use dex instead of str because it was more realistic. 

And if you study history while rare there were societies that woman had rights and protections in.

Again according to everything he has posted he claims they are evil but that there really is no group strong enough or motivated enough to oppose them.


----------



## Jimlock (Jul 8, 2011)

Oh... and because I always like to picture my characters in a game, here he is

Adolfius (Bard)
Lawful Evil


----------



## Hunter99 (Jul 8, 2011)

Elf Witch said:


> And if you study history while rare there were societies that woman had rights and protections in.




No. It was only the renaissance, the enlightenment and capitalism in the west that lead to women gaining rights.

Before that, the whole of history is one where women were treated chattel.


----------



## Dandu (Jul 8, 2011)

Sparta.


----------



## Elf Witch (Jul 8, 2011)

Hunter99 said:


> I thought their paganism would be obvious since Aphrodite is the greek goddess of love. (By paganism I don't mean the paganism of today. I mean that they follow the pagan maxim "eat, drink and be merry.")
> 
> As far as how life being unfair relates to D&D, if women were made physically equal and we pretended that in this fantasy world they had always had rights and everthing went as they wished, it would not be realistic. Consequently, it would be a bad story.




Aphrodite worshipers did not equate love with rape. 

One of the definitions is one who is a hedonist so I guess they could qualify under that. If you study paganism though while some may be of the eat, drink  be merry and some had orgies and used sex as a way to whip an orgasmic religious frenzy they usually did not endorse rape and coercion as a way to accomplish it.

Here is the way I am looking at it usually in stories with great evil the goal of the story is to over throw the evil. I don't really see that as your goal here. 

I have been playing DnD since 1E and I had really though the hobby had moved away from stuff like this. I think the majority of female gamers I know would be totally turned off by a game where the only choice you have is to be a mother or a whore. Unless the goal was to destroy and rebuild the society. 

I sometimes have issues when talking to woman I know who I think would love gaming to get them to realize that no it is not a boy's only club and we have moved past the days of chainmail bikinis and the majority of miniatures involved half dressed female wizards.


----------



## anest1s (Jul 8, 2011)

Hunter99 said:


> I thought their paganism would be obvious since Aphrodite is the greek goddess of love. (By paganism I don't mean the paganism of today. I mean that they follow the pagan maxim "eat, drink and be merry.")
> 
> As far as how life being unfair relates to D&D, if women were made physically equal and we pretended that in this fantasy world they had always had rights and everthing went as they wished, it would not be realistic. Consequently, it would be a bad story.




Except that a god you don't believe is, isn't necessarily a pagan god.

And she was married. And she was cheating. Neither order follows her ''dogma''.

I wont comment on the last part.

[MENTION=9037]Elf Witch[/MENTION]

I know, I just quoted you or it wouldn't make sense if I wasn't replying to someone 

The DEX thing will make woman stronger ironically.  

Matriarchy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Dandu (Jul 8, 2011)

> As far as how life being unfair relates to D&D, if women were made  physically equal and we pretended that in this fantasy world they had  always had rights and everthing went as they wished, it would not be  realistic. Consequently, it would be a bad story.



Gee, I must have written a bad story.


----------



## Elf Witch (Jul 8, 2011)

Hunter99 said:


> No. It was only the renaissance, the enlightenment and capitalism in the west that lead to women gaining rights.
> 
> Before that, the whole of history is one where women were treated chattel.




Delphi, Gortyn, Thessaly, Megara and Sparta as well as ancient Egypt.

Stoic philosophers argued for equality of the sexes, sexual inequality being in their view contrary to the laws of nature. In doing so, they followed the Cynics, who argued that men and women should wear the same clothing and receive the same kind of education. They also saw marriage as a moral companionship between equals rather than a biological or social necessity, and practiced these views in their lives as well as their teachings. The Stoics adopted the views of the Cynics and added them to their own theories of human nature, thus putting their sexual egalitarianism on a strong philosophical basis.[


----------



## Elf Witch (Jul 8, 2011)

anest1s said:


> Except that a god you don't believe is, isn't necessarily a pagan god.
> 
> And she was married. And she was cheating. Neither order follows her ''dogma''.
> 
> ...




Yes it would which is why I giggle when I read comments like giving female characters str penalties and giving them bonuses in dex.


----------



## anest1s (Jul 8, 2011)

Hunter99 said:


> No. It was only the renaissance, the enlightenment and capitalism in the west that lead to women gaining rights.
> 
> Before that, the whole of history is one where women were treated chattel.




Entrance to the shrine of the Minoan Snakegoddess, Crete, Cretan religion

And thats just the example I am most familiar with


----------



## Hunter99 (Jul 8, 2011)

And yet, when there was a conquest by some warlord, the first thing to do after the victory was round up all the young, beautiful women and ravish them.

Dandu, I haven't read your story so I can't say anything about that.

Edit: Miss, D&D is like theater or fiction writing. Both men and women can write fiction or engage in theater, but to ignore the realities of history is not going to allow me to run the type of campaign I want. I am interested in running a campaign which people can relate to and to deal with issues similar to those dealt with on the earth.

And women have opportunities in this campaign. It is possible for women to rise through the ranks of the Knights of the Scarlet Woman.


----------



## Dandu (Jul 8, 2011)

Hunter99 said:


> Dandu, I haven't read your story so I can't say anything about that.



If one accepts as true the axiom that one cannot say anything about a story before reading it, what of the statement you made concerning stories involving women who are as strong as men without knowing anything else about those stories?


> Edit: Miss, D&D is like theater or fiction writing. Both men and  women can write fiction or engage in theater, but to ignore the  realities of history is not going to allow me to run the type of  campaign I want.



What bearing does real life history have on a fictional fantasy setting?


----------



## Elf Witch (Jul 8, 2011)

Hunter99 said:


> And yet, when there was a conquest by some warlord, the first thing to do after the victory was round up all the young, beautiful women and ravish them.
> 
> Dandu, I haven't read your story so I can't say anything about that.




Actually they raped all the woman not just the beautiful ones I noticed that you seemed fixated on only beautiful woman. You said that your Knight only sexually liberate beautiful woman. 

Why is this? Is that you find the idea of beautiful women being raped hawt but it happening to ugly or elderly woman disgusting sort of along the lines that male homosexuality you find unnatural buy female homosexuality is not?

These warlords also killed most of them men including a lot of male children.

They also often made slaves of both sexes.

Both sexes suffered under these warlord it wasn't like the males of the conquered tribes kept their rights.


----------



## Elf Witch (Jul 8, 2011)

Hunter99 said:


> And yet, when there was a conquest by some warlord, the first thing to do after the victory was round up all the young, beautiful women and ravish them.
> 
> Dandu, I haven't read your story so I can't say anything about that.
> 
> ...




First of all I noticed you don't have an issue using the male posters here by their screen name so please stop calling me Miss. 

If you want to play a historically accurate game fine but I have never understood the I need my fantasy game to be historically accurate kind of thinking.

It kind of reminds me of people who complained about the Disney cartoon Mulan taking liberties with the history but over looked the fact that it had a talking dragon in it. 

Yes as a female character I have an opportunity to play a character who helps kidnap and force other woman to be raped.


----------



## Hunter99 (Jul 8, 2011)

The setting may be fictional, but even in a fictional setting I would like to see some resemblence to life on this earth and the struggles of people living on this earth.

For instance, have you asked why humans are the dominant species in D&D?

Why not elves who live longer? Or mindflayers?


----------



## anest1s (Jul 8, 2011)

Hunter99 said:


> And yet, when there was a conquest by some warlord, the first thing to do after the victory was round up all the young, beautiful women and ravish them.
> 
> Dandu, I haven't read your story so I can't say anything about that.
> 
> ...




This post is full of wrong.

What the decisions of the warlords have to do with any of those 2 orders. 

Why not read it now.

In theater and fiction, the author and the players try to tell a story. You try to tell one too. But no author ever told a story about a immoral murder who just kept killing ppl. And if he did he is unknown. Because he offered nothing to the viewer.

A woman who likes to be free can't play in that campaign. I mean a woman who disagrees with this order, but wants to be free from scarlet one too.



> For instance, have you asked why humans are the dominant species in D&D?




indeed why? Because the DM made them. There are worlds where goblins may be dominant.


----------



## Hunter99 (Jul 8, 2011)

A woman can join the Knights of the Scarlet Woman and try to assassinate their leader and become part of an underground resistance movement.

She can start a movement like the underground railroad.

There are many possibilities, but the DM cannot hand you're options to you on a plate.

Miss is easier than typing Elf Witch, and since you're the only (known) female poster, there is no chance of confusion.


----------



## Elf Witch (Jul 8, 2011)

Hunter99 said:


> The setting may be fictional, but even in a fictional setting I would like to see some resemblence to life on this earth and the struggles of people living on this earth.
> 
> For instance, have you asked why humans are the dominant species in D&D?
> 
> Why not elves who live longer? Or mindflayers?




The issue here when ever I hear this argument, and it usually being done to justify the mistreatment of female characters in a game, is that a fantasy game with magic really changes those struggles. 

There is an excellent book that deals with this I think it is called a Magical Medieval Society. In it they explore how just having healing magic and spells like purify and create food and water changes things.

And in your idea whose struggles are you looking at woman? And for what purpose? If it was to allow woman to over throw the bonds of servitude and sexual slavery then I could see it.

But from everything you have wrote it seems that the struggles you want to look at is the struggle for men to get laid.


----------



## Elf Witch (Jul 8, 2011)

Hunter99 said:


> A woman can join the Knights of the Scarlet Woman and try to assassinate their leader and become part of an underground resistance movement.
> 
> She can start a movement like the underground railroad.
> 
> ...




Okay but did you not say in an earlier post that a group of powerful woman would not have a chance and would be taken down?

If you don't want to type Elf Witch how about MS. I am a grown woman who has been married with a grown son older then you.


----------



## Elf Witch (Jul 8, 2011)

anest1s said:


> A woman who likes to be free can't play in that campaign. I mean a woman who disagrees with this order, but wants to be free from scarlet one too.
> 
> 
> 
> indeed why? Because the DM made them. There are worlds where goblins may be dominant.




In my one campaign world humans are the minority. They are a young race and the elder races are still at full power and glory.


----------



## Hunter99 (Jul 8, 2011)

My apologies.

Yes, if a woman wanted to overthrow these knightly orders through brute force, the way a conqueror would attempt to, she would have no chance.

Guile is another matter.

As far as the campaign being about men looking to get laid, I can only repeat what another poster has said in some other thread: there is better porn on the internet.

Edit: The purpose of the story was not so much about women, although they enter into the story, but about sexual morality and two opposing views of life.

The secular, liberal, pagan view and the conservative, religious view.

These knighthoods are two evil organizations, but each follows one of these philosophies.

Now it is true that neither of them are good, because the conflict here was never between good vs. evil.

Now with the entrance of PCs into the events that are transpiring, things become different because the PCs can make choices and choose to be good.

It also provides for an interesting campaign since it creates a conflict of values within the PCs.


----------



## ExploderWizard (Jul 8, 2011)

OK. Since no one has brought this up yet and I am dying to know the answer:

What does this order have to with virginity/chastity? 

With a name like "Knights of the Virgin" one would expect them to have ideals that center around that concept. 

From the description the order neither enforces or even promotes the concept of virginity, chastity, or purity. 

Knights of the Virgin use women as breeding devices? 

That does just not compute. How did the order gets its name given that it has nothing to do with concept it was named after?


----------



## Bagpuss (Jul 8, 2011)

Hunter99 said:


> These are the villains in a tentative campaign which I am thinking of running.




I'm sorry I thought we had established that the Knights of the Scarlet Woman were the villains, what with the rape and kidnapping and all.


----------



## xigbar (Jul 8, 2011)

Haven't I seen this thread before?


----------



## domino (Jul 8, 2011)

Bagpuss said:


> I'm sorry I thought we had established that the Knights of the Scarlet Woman were the villains, what with the rape and kidnapping and all.



No, they're the group the PCs are intended to join.  They're doing women a favor, after all.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jul 8, 2011)

Hunter99 said:


> As far as how life being unfair relates to D&D, if women were made physically equal and we pretended that in this fantasy world they had always had rights and everthing went as they wished, it would not be realistic. Consequently, it would be a bad story.




"It's a helicopter, and it's coming this way. It's flying something behind it, I can't quite make it out, it's a large banner and it says, uh - Happy... Thaaaaanksss... giving! ... From ... W ... K ... R... P!! No parachutes yet. Can't be skydivers... I can't tell just yet what they are, but - Oh my God, Johnny, they're DRAGONS!! Johnny, can you get this? Oh, they're plunging to the earth right in front of our eyes! One just went through the windshield of a parked car! Oh, the humanity! The dragons are hitting the ground like sacks of wet cement! Not since the Hindenburg tragedy has there been anything like this!"

"Les? Les? Les, are you there? Les isn't there. Thanks for that on-the-spot report, Les. For those of you who've just tuned in, the Pinedale Shopping Mall has just been bombed with live dragons. Film at eleven."

"As God is my witness, I thought dragons could fly!!!"


----------



## Umbran (Jul 8, 2011)

Hunter99 said:


> It is only when the campaign presents such difficult choices that a real conflict of values is created in the minds of the players.




But, I don't think that's what you have here.  

You get a real conflict of values in the minds of the players when the player is not sure of which side is correct.  It is clear that both of these are incorrect - there's no conflict of values for the player if both the sides presented are horribly evil.  

To oversimplify slightly - if you present the players with a demon and a devil, they aren't going to quibble much over the Law and Chaos issue.


----------



## xigbar (Jul 8, 2011)

Beat me to it by 10 seconds, Umbran. And that's also why you either need a third faction that people have been suggesting, or add some spots of good in both factions, to make them part of the "grey area."


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jul 8, 2011)

> From the description the order neither enforces or even promotes the concept of virginity, chastity, or purity.
> 
> Knights of the Virgin use women as breeding devices?
> 
> That does just not compute. How did the order gets its name given that it has nothing to do with concept it was named after?




Good catch.

I'm up to three islands of facepalms.  Does that officially make it an archipelago?


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jul 8, 2011)

> Yes, if a woman wanted to overthrow these knightly orders through brute force, the way a conqueror would attempt to, she would have no chance.




You've posited a campaign world full of men who are so misogynistic, a woman cannot find more than (presumably) an adventuring party's worth people willing & able to take up arms against the oppression of half of the human species.  Seemingly even among the divine beings are cool with this, because no female deity (or deities) has decided to just *Call* an army of Paladins to champion the cause of alleviating the suffering of their followers.

Niiiiiiiiiice.


----------



## Hunter99 (Jul 8, 2011)

Most of those who believe in chastity as an idea do not mean by this that women should stop producing children, as that would result in the extinction of the race.

The conflict of values exists because these two knightly orders are going to be the dominant powers in the campaign, and at least at first, the players will not be able to openly oppose them and will need to feign some kind of acquiescence.

Edit: As far as divine beings are concerned, I plan to have a campaign where gods don't walk the earth.


----------



## anest1s (Jul 8, 2011)

Dannyalcatraz said:


> Good catch.
> 
> I'm up to three islands of facepalms.  Does that officially make it an archipelago?




You should probably wear a helm or something, or you risk permanent damage to yourself


----------



## xigbar (Jul 8, 2011)

Hunter99 said:


> Edit: As far as divine beings are concerned, I plan to have a campaign where gods don't walk the earth.




They generally don't walk the earth in the first place, so you'd have to outright eliminate, them or deal with the aforementioned ARMY OF PALADINS.


----------



## domino (Jul 8, 2011)

Dannyalcatraz said:


> Seemingly even among the divine beings are cool with this, because no female deity (or deities) has decided to just *Call* an army of Paladins to champion the cause of alleviating the suffering of their followers.



All the female deities are busy being raped or forced to make babies by the male deities.


----------



## Hunter99 (Jul 8, 2011)

I plan to keep the celestial influences in my game to a minimum. To have a group of superbeings ready to provide you with infallible knowledge of good and evil makes the game too easy and unrealistic.

For instance, if you noticed, I said that the Knights of the Virgin are allied with certain celestial beings. (not deities, but angels.)

Celestial's in my game will be fallible just like human beings, if they enter into the fray at all.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jul 8, 2011)

Hunter99 said:


> Most of those who believe in chastity as an idea do not mean by this that women should stop producing children, as that would result in the extinction of the race.




In both Western and Eastern traditions, chastity is a virtue, the pracice of which is defined not by the elimination of sexual activity, but restricted to certain circumstances- usually within a sanctified relationship, such as marriage.  As such your KV order has a logical disconnect since it is forcing women to bear children in the service of the Order.  That meets no definition of chastity.  Perhaps you meant something other than "conscripted", because that is incongruent with the virtue of chastity in this context.



> The conflict of values exists because these two knightly orders are going to be the dominant powers in the campaign, and at least at first, the players will not be able to openly oppose them and will need to feign some kind of acquiescence.




The conflict of values is simply between evil and "eviler-er"- and according to you, the majority of the world follows one or the other of these ethoi.

As I have pointed out, this is just devils & demons.  There is no real heroic conflict here for PCs other than which repugnance to eradicate first.

To put it differently, you've designed a world in which the Nazis and Stalinists are the only major sociopolitical forces, and the majority of the world agrees with one or the other, because there are clearly no Allies.


> Edit: As far as divine beings are concerned, I plan to have a campaign where gods don't walk the earth.



This isn't about gods walking the earth, this is about gods being so revolted that they call up followers of their own to take up arms against an injustice the god perceives needs destroying- kind of _the core_ of the Paladin as a figure in myth, legend and FRPG class.


----------



## Hunter99 (Jul 8, 2011)

I did not mean something other than conscripted.

I intentionally put conscripted.

The order's logic goes something like this:

If men are being conscripted to fight in the army, why shouldn't women be conscripted to produce children to fight in the army?

Most RW believers in chastity praise women who have many children so there is no conflict.

Edit: Gods who don't walk the earth could also be interepreted as non-existent gods.


----------



## ExploderWizard (Jul 8, 2011)

I'm still waiting for an answer to my question.

What does this order have to do with virgins or the concept of virginity?


----------



## Hunter99 (Jul 8, 2011)

They are going to be worshipping a virgin as their deity. (Similar to the Virgin Mary)

Edit: Not to mention they're anti-sex.


----------



## domino (Jul 8, 2011)

In this game setting, where will the PCs be starting out? In an area controlled by the Knights of the Beaten Women, or one controlled by the Knights of the Look at the Way She Was Dressed?


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jul 8, 2011)

> Most RW believers in chastity praise women who have many children so there is no conflict.



This is a gross misinterpretation of...well...every faith I can think of that values chastity.

Again, in most faiths, chastity means that sexual intercourse is limited to sanctified relationships such as marriages.  How can the relationship be sacred when one party is forced into it?

The concept of being fruitful and multiplying is concept unrelated to chastity- having kids means more followers in the faith, and even the unchaste faiths want that.  Only the Shakers demand all their followers be celibate, AFAIK.


> Edit: Gods who don't walk the earth could also be interepreted as non-existent gods.




Then from where do divine-themed classes draw their powers?  Are thee no Clerics, Favored Souls and Paladins?

If there are, and they have all of their class abilities, the question is begged: if all the evil forces have their divinely themed powers, where is the counterforce?

Or are even the divine beings granting spells and powers just as misogynistic as humanity?


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jul 8, 2011)

Hunter99 said:


> They are going to be worshipping a virgin as their deity. (Similar to the Virgin Mary)




I'm not seeing any similarity.



> Edit: Not to mention they're anti-sex.




If they were anti-sex, they'd have a structure more like Shakers (except they would be loathsome).  Shakers are so devout in their beliefs that ALL of those in the faith are celibate.  They maintain their numbers strictly through conversion of adults.

An anti-sex organization would find the concept of conscripted babymakers to be anathema.


----------



## Hunter99 (Jul 8, 2011)

Clerics exist, but gods grant spells to clerics even if they do not follow the alignment of their god. 

In this game clerics can be evil and still worship a good deity and receive their spells.

Edit: They are anti-sex because they believe that sex is evil and that a person should only have sex for reproductive purposes and not for fun.

Edit: I have not yet decided where the PCs will start. Although, given that in the areas controlled by the Knights of the Virgin they are likely to be drafted, they will probably be starting in the areas controlled by the Knights of the Scarlet Woman.


----------



## ExploderWizard (Jul 8, 2011)

Hunter99 said:


> They are going to be worshipping a virgin as their deity. (Similar to the Virgin Mary)




Okay.




Hunter99 said:


> Edit: Not to mention they're anti-sex.




Really? "Conscripting" women as breeders with no indication that there are any kind of recognized unions. 

If they were anti-sex then they would be kidnapping existing children to turn into soldiers rather than making more of them. 

So the order worships a virgin being then proceeds to serve this being by populating the world with soldiers born to rape victims? 

..........and this virgin deity is fine with that?


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jul 8, 2011)

> Hunter99
> Edit: Gods who don't walk the earth could also be interepreted as non-existent gods.






> Hunter99
> Clerics exist, but gods grant spells to clerics even if they do not follow the alignment of their god.




Make up your mind- do they exist or don't they?


> In this game clerics can be evil and still worship a good deity and receive their spells.




Sooo, you can worship a god and receive his or her blessings, even though you may be taking actions that are expressly against the god's goals?  That's F-ed up on a very deep theological level.



> Edit: They are anti-sex because they believe that sex is evil and that a person should only have sex for reproductive purposes and not for fun.




Well, that's not really anti-sex.  That's just anti-hedonism.


----------



## Hunter99 (Jul 8, 2011)

Religious conservatives in the America believe in promoting family values and having lots of children and they are anti-sex so the apparent conflict between being anti-sex and pro-family (at least allegedly pro-family) doesn't exist.


----------



## ExploderWizard (Jul 8, 2011)

Hunter99 said:


> Clerics exist, but gods grant spells to clerics even if they do not follow the alignment of their god.
> 
> In this game clerics can be evil and still worship a good deity and receive their spells.




Do you plan on telling cleric PCs not to bother roleplaying or having beliefs for thier characters because it simply doesn't matter?


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jul 8, 2011)

Hunter99 said:


> Religious conservatives in the America believe in promoting family values and having lots of children and they are anti-sex so the apparent conflict between being anti-sex and pro-family (at least allegedly pro-family) doesn't exist.




Again, that's not anti-sex.  That is anti-sex _pushes of a concecrated relationship._. Biiiiig difference.

It was a religious conservative who first told me of the existence of the Kama Sutra...and how it helped keep their (then) 30 year marriage fresh.


----------



## Hunter99 (Jul 8, 2011)

Of course they can RP and have beliefs.

This doesn't mean that there will not be clerics who are corrupt.

The purpose of having no alignment restrictions for clerics is to make the campaign more realistic.


----------



## a-d (Jul 8, 2011)

First off, if the campaign you're considering making is supposed to be Player Characters (PC's) being put into a world of two extremes you aren't taking it far enough.

*If it's a Thought Experiment:*
The Order of the Scarlet Woman will have to allow total homosexuality and use the charm spells on the men as well should they not be interested in sex. They would also be unable to leave.
And since you will have high ranking women in the order they will have to also kidnap men they consider handsome and the order will have to assist. And not merely assist, wholeheartedly agree with her actions.

The Order of the Virgin will have to force men to marry as well since it is realistic to assume there will be those who do not wish to. And not just because they are gay, a player, or dislike sex.
It is also reasonable to assume that women will have discovered ways of manipulating their environment to force certain men to be with certain women, so being beautiful/handsome in your world would have a number of automatic dangers.

*Sex and Gender Spells.*
Then of course there are the polymorph/curse spells made permanent which would turn wo/men into wo/men and expand the potential targets for either side.
This is more likely to be done by the order of the scarlet woman but it's use by the order of the virgin is almost certainly done as well.

Then again, if you're going to accept the effect of the polymorph/curse spells then why not expand it to hermaphrodites? (Both at once.)
This would probably be limited to the order of the scarlet woman.

*If this is not merely a campaign based upon the characters examining the two extremes and is instead based upon your own, personal prejudices...*

I'd say you aren't thinking far enough into the future.

_Women are automatically physically weaker than men?_
A few dozen decades of breeding programs would switch that around.
Especially if the program focus was also on breeding men who'd be physically weaker.

Granted, this ignores the advantages equipment can have in making personal strength irrelevant.
A man a woman both have machine guns and unlimited ammo. Who wins?
But let's make it clearer.
A woman and a man both have tanks with unlimited fuel and ammo. Who wins?
For extra fun lets play with genetic engineering. After all that's the realm of intelligence not strength.
You both have access to all the body altering and enhancement serums you wish. Which one will win?

_While you haven't said it explicitly your order of the virgin sees women as the baby makers?_
It's only a matter of time before artificial wombs are created and used with artificial insemination so women will be able to avoid the unpleasant aspects of pregnancy. Granted, that will cause them to not experience the pleasures associated with pregnancy and might cause unexpected social problems, but we won't know how bad or even if they will occur until it happens.

And if artificial wombs are created it will only be a short time afterward that implantation of those wombs into men will be proposed for those interested in experiencing pregnancy for themselves.
Granted, this is a near future thing for ourselves and not a concern for those of the medieval age.

Unless you take into account Spells and Artificers...

*Outside of futuristic considerations:*
_A woman wouldn't be able to crush both of these orders on their own through brute force?_
Realistically? Probably not, but by the same token a single person couldn't defend either of these orders by themselves through brute force so it's irrelevant.

_Considering the stability or likelihood of either Order?_
The Order of the Scarlet Woman looks like it has a limited lifespan.
While the Order of the Virgin would be at risk of losing half of it's population potential application to diplomatic, economic, scientific, philosophic, etc issues the Order of the Scarlet Woman would be allowing women who had to hide their personal opinions on kidnapping, forced sexual activities, and most importantly forced application of charm spells in positions of high authority.
Unless high ranking members, especially high ranking female members were to automatically be placed under charm spells the order would quickly tame itself, if not tear itself apart entirely.

Even if high ranking members were automatically put under charm spells it would only slow the orders rate of collapse.
Lower ranking members who hid their personal opinions would be looking for ways out of the order and if they found one would take it. Probably pulling other members along with them.

If all members of the order have charm spells placed upon them the problem still isn't halted because if the orders use of mentally affecting charm spells is public knowledge (And it would become public knowledge via the criminal underground.) then the public would consider joining or being dragged to the orders headquarters tantamount to "personality death."

_On the Battlefield._
This is without the natural advantage opposing forces would have against members of the order of the scarlet woman when using dispel or greater dispel against the orders troops.
Someone who is suddenly free of the compulsion to agree with the orders dogma is going to less likely to be effective in combat and much more likely to be teeth-grindingly upset about what was done to them.

Tactically, if I wanted to take out both oders it seems like the order of the virgin would be the one I'd destroy first. The order of the scarlet woman would either hemorrhage it's populace and members to my side if they aren't automatically charming everyone, collapse, or be so weakened by the loss of their main enemy that they could be taken relatively easily.

Politically however, to get the numbers needed to take on either side would probably require fighting against the order of the scarlet woman first since a merely repressive society would beat out a society which practices personality death, followed by physical and psychological abuse.

These options however are based on the idea that these are the only two options available to those looking for truly powerful backers during a takeover bid.
Which seems unlikely.

*Personally,*
It is interesting that of the two extremes it is the order of the scarlet woman who have decided that charm spells are required.
It gives the appearance of weakness to their cause.

The problem your orders and potentially you too have from your use of "Miss" instead of "Elf Witch" is the application of what I believe is called the Golden Rule.
"Do unto others as you would have done unto you."
Translation: "Treat others in the same way you would like to be treated."

Personal Translation: "If there is something you wouldn't want to have happen to you, then don't do it to other people."

I think that's from one of the Adam and Eve based bibles, but I'm not sure.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jul 8, 2011)

> This doesn't mean that there will not be clerics who are corrupt.
> 
> The purpose of having no alignment restrictions for clerics is to make the campaign more realistic.



The gods are a bit smarter than that.  At least the Good ones are.

In game terms, a Devotee of Hexor hiding within in a Heironean sect in order to bring it down from within would not be worshipping Heironeous but Hexor, and thus, would be receiving his powers from Hexor.  Unless and until he revealed himself, he might appear to be a member of the faith, and even a real player in the hierarchy.

But the source of his power would NOT be the divinity he is only pretending to worship.

Even if you posit that deities have a dark side that attracts certain people to a twisted version of their faith, then there's this little thing called "Detect Evil" that D&D faiths have to deal with.  Historically, this has meant that "evil priests have their own sect" that the good followers and priests don't normally interact with.


----------



## Umbran (Jul 8, 2011)

*A couple of you have taken to including real-world religion in this discussion. 

Please stop.  It is against EN World Rules.  *


----------



## Hunter99 (Jul 8, 2011)

A-d, you had some interesting points.

Especially the one about charms wearing off. 

It is possible that I change the K.S.W. so that only those who join voluntarily are considered knights and the women who are kidnapped do not become knights.


----------



## a-d (Jul 8, 2011)

That would only reduce infiltration issues and would severely reduce both the orders military strength and public image.

However, I can appreciate having such orders in a campaign I was in.

The thought of being allowed to smash them makes my eyes glow red and my teeth turn sharp as I smile.


----------



## ExploderWizard (Jul 8, 2011)

I can envision the campaign now.......

A mighty struggle to topple two orders of knighthood undertaken by a small but dedicated party of heroes made up of homosexual men, homely women, and dwarves (of indeterminate gender) who fight for freedom as representatives of sentient being rights. 

Unwanted by the powers that be, they fight for truth, justice, and the hope that someday society will care as little for straight men and lovely women  as it does for them!!


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jul 8, 2011)

ExploderWizard said:


> I can envision the campaign now.......
> 
> A mighty struggle to topple two orders of knighthood undertaken by a small but dedicated party of heroes made up of homosexual men, homely women, and dwarves (of indeterminate gender) who fight for freedom as representatives of sentient being rights.
> 
> Unwanted by the powers that be, they fight for truth, justice, and the hope that someday society will care as little for straight men and lovely women  as it does for them!!



Wrap this up in spandex superhero outfits, and the game might be tolerable!


----------



## ExploderWizard (Jul 8, 2011)

Squidster said:


> Quote deleted by moderator




I disagree. Without feedback from reality how do such people find out how whacked they really are? Its a vital first step in self evaluation.

Edit: Besides he's bound to calm down once he finds the dominatrix that he's always been looking for.

*Mod Edit:*  You're not in trouble, and you make a good point here.  But please don't quote outright insulting passages, or other stuff that breaks the rules.  It makes more work for us when we clean up. ~Umbran


----------



## Umbran (Jul 8, 2011)

Folks, 

You have a right to dislike things.  Even to find them abhorrent.  But breaking the rules yourself is not a good way to get us to see your side of things.

If you find it really offensive, report it, and walk away, please.


----------



## kitcik (Jul 8, 2011)

Mod Edit: this should have been put into a report to mods, rather than in public.  Please, follow your own advice below. ~Umbran

So, I suggest --> stop playing into it and move on.

Anyways, just a thought.


----------



## ExploderWizard (Jul 8, 2011)

Squidster said:


> < stuff>




While I do not agree with the OP's opinions I support his right discuss whatever he wants so long as he follows the community rules. 

His personal views have nothing whatsoever to do with any industry and hinting that the ramblings of one lone voice harm the industry is giving him too much credit.


----------



## Umbran (Jul 8, 2011)

*A couple of you seem to be having some trouble following the rules of EN World.

If you have a problem with a post REPORT IT AND WALK AWAY.

There's a little button on the bottom left of each post - a triangle with an exclamation point in it.  Learn to use it.*


----------



## a-d (Jul 8, 2011)

*My apologies.*

I shouldn't have insulted the original poster and the biblical reference was unnecessary.
And potentially incorrect. Where does the golden rule come from anyway?

Also, could someone place a link to EnWorld's rules?
I'm having trouble finding them.


----------



## jdrakeh (Jul 8, 2011)

a-d said:


> Where does the golden rule come from anyway?




Ancient Babylon. No kidding.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jul 8, 2011)

a-d said:


> I shouldn't have insulted the original poster and the biblical reference was unnecessary.
> And potentially incorrect. Where does the golden rule come from anyway?
> 
> Also, could someone place a link to EnWorld's rules?
> I'm having trouble finding them.



Here you go.  Rules of ENWorld


----------



## Jimlock (Jul 9, 2011)

Hey!!! the Hymn of both Orders is on utube!!!!

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYOUYw6P0_4]YouTube - ‪Manowar - Pleasure Slave‬‏[/ame]

*Lyrics!!!*


----------



## Ettin (Jul 9, 2011)

Any halfway decent gamer would be about as comfortable in this  hypothetical game of yours as a Spanish king in an elephant's anus.

I did like the idea of a party of women and homosexual men crushing both of these mysogyny-fests, though.


----------



## StreamOfTheSky (Jul 9, 2011)

Ettin said:


> Any halfway decent gamer would be about as comfortable in this  hypothetical game of yours as a Spanish king in an elephant's anus.




There are several male and female historical members of Spanish royalty that I would be more than comfortable to have shoved into an elephant's anus.  I'd feel bad for the elephant, though.


...Where the heck did that phrase come from?


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jul 9, 2011)

> Where the heck did that phrase come from?




Probably NOT from an elephant.


----------



## Jackinthegreen (Jul 9, 2011)

The concept of these two warring factions is pretty decent, if a bit overdramatic for my own tastes.  Were I in that campaign, I'd say both are evil and thus not choose a side, because they both make me want to hit something.  Kinda reminds me of politics actually.

Back to the campaign though, I'm guessing both sides manage to make their own version of "If you're not with us, you're against us" kind of drivel.  I'd personally get as far away from them as I could.


----------



## RedTonic (Jul 10, 2011)

Both of these orders just do an incredible disservice to the men of this supposed campaign setting. Are almost all of your fictional men really walking rape-machines incapable of seeing women as anything but whores; desirable objects; potential enemies; baby-vessels; pitiable, ignorant savages requiring education; or pitiable, weak wretches requiring liberation by the mighty power of the penis?

You point out what you conceive of as weaknesses in real world women--and you even go so far as to "other" a female poster in this topic by repeatedly referring to her as "Miss," though you don't respond to other (presumably male) posters as "Master," the equivalent polite-diminutive for unattached men--and barely bat an eye at contradictory evidence. You even redefine terms to create your own vocabulary, and appear to be amused that other people are arguing using the actual, common definitions of those terms (virgin, chastity).

What kind of value does this offer us as a community? This hasn't been presented as a mental exercise, at least not in an open fashion. You posted these write-ups ostensibly requesting feedback, which you refute and deflect at nearly every turn.

To at least some extent, almost everyone here has engaged you at your word: that you want constructive criticism. You haven't taken it or incorporated it into your entries--so what is it, exactly, that you want?


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jul 11, 2011)

RedTonic said:


> Both of these orders just do an incredible disservice to the men of this supposed campaign setting. Are almost all of your fictional men really walking rape-machines incapable of seeing women as anything but whores; desirable objects; potential enemies; baby-vessels; pitiable, ignorant savages requiring education; or pitiable, weak wretches requiring liberation by the mighty power of the penis?
> 
> You point out what you conceive of as weaknesses in real world women--and you even go so far as to "other" a female poster in this topic by repeatedly referring to her as "Miss," though you don't respond to other (presumably male) posters as "Master," the equivalent polite-diminutive for unattached men--and barely bat an eye at contradictory evidence. You even redefine terms to create your own vocabulary, and appear to be amused that other people are arguing using the actual, common definitions of those terms (virgin, chastity).
> 
> ...




Gosh darn it- I can't XP you right now, but know that I would.


----------



## pawsplay (Jul 11, 2011)

Hunter99 said:


> I agree with Aristotle's idea of a golden mean, but when it is a question of moral principles, there can be no compromise.




"... not even in the face of Armageddon."


----------



## pawsplay (Jul 11, 2011)

ExploderWizard said:


> I'm still waiting for an answer to my question.
> 
> What does this order have to do with virgins or the concept of virginity?




They're named after their founder, a legendary hunter, 99th of his line.


----------



## Ettin (Jul 11, 2011)

pawsplay said:


> They're named after their founder, a legendary hunter, 99th of his line.




He's clearly a Knight of the Scarlet Woman, according to his status.

That's better, right?



Right?


----------



## Jimlock (Jul 11, 2011)

You must spread some Experience Points around before giving it to RedTonic again. 

what does he want? 

If I was to answer sincerely to this question, it would probably be replaced by a whole lot of red.

And not because I would be insulting.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jul 11, 2011)

Ideally, we should ever strive to be Knights of the Wheaton, who has but one rule.

(And would be diametrically opposed to both of Hunters' proposed orders...)


----------



## domino (Jul 11, 2011)

Dannyalcatraz said:


> Ideally, we should ever strive to be Knights of the Wheaton, who has but one rule.



Kidnap women and make them play obnoxious Star Trek characters?


----------



## Dandu (Jul 11, 2011)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCCdJ-6Bpbk]YouTube - ‪Andy Williams - A Time For Us‬‏[/ame]


----------



## pawsplay (Jul 11, 2011)

Your ideas are very interesting, Hunter99. I wonder if you have ever thoughts about doing something similar with ethnic purity, rather than sexual purity, as the theme. Knights of the Alabaster Chalice or somesuch.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jul 11, 2011)

How about _Order of the Dead Horse_?  Their most holy ritual would involve beating it with a stick.


----------



## Umbran (Jul 12, 2011)

Theo R Cwithin said:


> How about _Order of the Dead Horse_?  Their most holy ritual would involve beating it with a stick.





That's pretty much how it has gone, yes.

Thread closed.
---------------------


*Mod Note*: Ladies and Gentlemen, we'd not had threads like this in the past, so we never needed a policy to handle them.  In the wake of this, we've discussed and implemented a new policy, to make our position on the matter clear.  ~Umbran, EN World Moderator

http://www.enworld.org/forum/meta/3...g-molestation-rape-other-such-discussion.html


----------

