|
4 years ago ::
Feb 20, 2009 - 12:00AM
#1
|
|
|
Reading through the DMG, and looking up his commands... well, you could actually be a Lawful Good character and follow Bane with no real issue.
Let's look them over:
- Hone your combat skills to perfection, whether you are a mighty general or a lone mercenary. Nothing evil there. In fact, that's pretty much the creed of any martial character.
- Punish insubordination and disorder. Again, not evil. That's being lawful. Most organization, from lowly business to the military, will punish this. There's no requirement to make the punishment humiliating or over the top either. Or are we to believe Drill Sergeants and anybody who ever fired someone for incompetence is evil?
- Never allow your fear to gain mastery over you, but drive it into the hearts of your foe. The first part is definitely not evil. The second part gets close... having your enemy fear you isn't evil in itself, but the mean used to instill this fear might be. Still, it doesn't mean you need to even come as a cruel... For example, a paladin of pelor who's known to hunt the Undead relentlessly will probably become feared once he get a couple level by most sentient undead, making him qualifty for this tenet while still being Good.
For an evil god, he seems to ask no real evil deed from his followers.
Granted, follower of banes are probably not going to be overly nice people nor will they be the type of people you want to invite to a party... but Good (and even more so, Lawful Good) doesn't need to be 'nice'... you can be a jerk and represent those alignments. And even so, if the follower of bane see you as an ally or a friend, he might be the nicest guy in the world to you, loyal unto death.
Now I understand that Bane is the god of war. That war is bad.
And on a view point of morals... how evil is war? Is the solder who serve his country evil? Is at country that goes to war evil? Do the reason matter or is the mere act of being at war constitute a switch to evil? How long after participating in such war does the country stop being evil?
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Feb 20, 2009 - 12:17AM
#2
|
|
|
He's evil because he's a god of war and tyranny. Tyrants are universally considered evil (at least as far as D&D is concerned) so being a god of tyrants basically makes him evil by default. When Bane says punish he usually means kill, or at least severely injure/imprison for years/maim etc etc.
I wouldn't say war is inherently evil. However the reason behind a war can be. Waging a war of conquest, domination, and destruction (the kind of war bane is concerned with) is something most people would say is evil. Defending ones homeland from that war most would say is however just.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Feb 20, 2009 - 12:23AM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Sep 29, 2008
|
Basically Bane is evil because he is the god of War for Conquest and Tyranny. Kord's followers go to war to prove their strength and might, Bane's followers go to war to conquer others.
As evil gods go, Bane isn't that bad, and as the recent article shows he does have Unaligned and even Good followers who focus on his militaristic aspects; he is Evil, but he's not "I eat babies" Evil, he's just not very nice.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Feb 20, 2009 - 12:46AM
#4
|
|
|
A good character can have Bane in their personal pantheon without any moral dissonance whatsoever.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Feb 20, 2009 - 12:49AM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Sep 29, 2008
|
The ironic thing about Bane is that war for conquest is only 'evil' in modern terms, if you look back at people's attitudes during medieval times Bane would probably fit right in.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Feb 20, 2009 - 1:03AM
#6
|
|
|
The ironic thing about Bane is that war for conquest is only 'evil' in modern terms, if you look back at people's attitudes during medieval times Bane would probably fit right in.
The catch is that D&D does not take place at any point in real world history, rendering such a comparison rather moot, IMNSHO. 
Anyway, I agree with the OP that a good character could worship Bane. An evil character could worship Pelor, too. That's the nice thing about the 'gods are distant' and 'once the power is yours, it's yours to keep' aspects of 4e religion. Your character can (mis)interpret the god's teachings in the way you want him to, and not have to worry about a DM 'U haz no pwrs now, u sux, kthxbai' nonsense.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Feb 20, 2009 - 1:09AM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Sep 29, 2008
|
The catch is that D&D does not take place at any point in real world history, rendering such a comparison rather moot, IMNSHO.
Oh i know, but i still find it ironic.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Feb 20, 2009 - 3:46AM
#8
|
|
|
I agree with tyrandor (the OP). By downplaying the 'tyranny' aspect of Bane and focusing more on the Bane's influences on 'war' and 'conquest', he could work as an unaligned deity.
An unaligned Bane would be a bit more adaptable for me, more useful than a strictly evil deity. For one thing, as an unaligned deity, he becomes available for PC use. Also, as an unaligned god, Bane could easily be worshipped by a villain, who focuses mainly on the 'tyranny' aspects. In this specific case, Bane is much more sinister, even evil.
An unaligned Bane could 'swing both ways'. I knew Steve Argyle (the artist) was onto something with that pic in the Bane article (Dragon #372) :P.
/\ Art
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Feb 20, 2009 - 4:05AM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Sep 29, 2008
|
The Bane article from Dragon actually suggests rather heavily that even though most percieve Bane as an Evil god; this is not neccesarily true.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Feb 20, 2009 - 4:45AM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Dec 18, 2007
|
Yeah, I agree with OP that it's sometimes hard to percieve him as a truely evil god, since the domination and tyranny aspect can't be always percieved as "truly evil".
Another thing, is it coincidence that he looks like he's been taken straight out of The 300?
|
|
|
