Paladins in a game, how I run them...

[Treebore]

A paladin is a complex character to play, because unlike any other class, except the Knight, they have a defined code they must adhere to, or lose their class abilities. Possibly for good. The main problem is, the CK and the player rarely see eye to eye on what that code, as well as the alignment, Lawful Good, entails. How, exactly, does a rather rigidly adherent person of Law and Good behave? Are they extremely black and white, or do they have shades of grey? If they do have shades of grey, how Grey can they get without going too far and losing their status? Again, this gets complicated, because I would guess it is very rare for a CK and a player to see eye to eye on all the various possibilities.

For example, would a Paladin torture in order to save the lives of innocents? Would a Paladin use poison? Can they use Poisons to paralyze and capture, but not kill? Not everyone will agree on what the proper answers to these questions are for the Paladin. What if the Paladin comes from a society that requires strict adherence to their religion, and typically kills all non believers, regardless of their alignment? Regardless of their age and gender? The classic "convert or die" type of religion?

Personally, I have a general guideline, as long as the Paladin is adhering to the laws of their faith first, and only, unless their faith also determines the laws of the land they live in, they cover the law part. I am also nice enough to assume the Paladin has these rules well ingrained into them by their teachers and trainers. So will warn them if they will break any of them. So the law part is pretty easy to handle. Most problems I have ran into is what is considered "Good". Do you sacrifice one for the many, or many for the one? If that one is someone destined by some prophecy to become some great hero of your faith, do you allow innocents to die in order to save them? Or do you put faith into the prophecy, and save the many innocents, assuming the power behind the prophecy will protect the one? Or, going back to what I said earlier, do you engage in torture, in order to save the innocent? Or is the greater good to let the innocent die rather than perform torturre? Personally, when I question a players actions in situations like these, I ask them to give me their reasons why they think they are adhering to their faith and oaths. If I see reasons to disagree with them, I will ask questions in turn to address my concerns. Then I will tell them the likely consequences of their actions. Again, I do this, because I think a Paldin would be well drilled on the tenets of their faith and code. So would have a good idea as to what the consequences would be, and since I cannot possibly write out such a detailed faith or code, let alone expect a player to learn so much, this is how I approximate that character knowledge.

So if I am going to have a player lose their Paladin status, they will have a good idea that is going to be the outcome if they chose that course of action. So in my games, there can be situations where a Paldin can torture. There are situations where they can use poisons, as long as the poison is not used to kill. so if they paralyze a target, they cannot then kill that target, they must take them prisoner.

Paladins are frequently also followers of a God of Justice, so now we get into Judge Dredd kind of situations, where the Paladin can and cannot be judge, jury and executioner. Generally, if they are within easy reach of a proper court and prison, they must take them to it. If they are too far out, or in enemy type territory, then the Paladin can act as Judge Dredd, and be judge, jury, and executioner. Again, if I think there is a question to the actions the Paladin is going to do, I will start with the explanation and questions, then let them know the likely outcome of their Gods judgement of the situation.

So this is how I handle being the CK of a Paladin, and frankly, I only play under a CK who does at least close to the same thing I do. I certainly do not want to invest the time and extra effort into playing a Paladin, and have their abilities stripped in the blink of an eye, and I'm certainly not going to do that to any of my players. So I find my system to be a good compromise.

[Jyrdan Fairblade]

A solid take on the paladin. To me, a paladin should be more than just a cleric that can use swords.

A paladin that’s not lawful good never quite feels right to me. At a con I just played at, one of the PCs was a paladin, and essentially tortured and waterboarded the main villain, once he had been captured. That just didn’t sit right with me.

[Tadhg]

Great posts!

In my games I didn't have any problems at all with paladins, since I don't have evil humans. Probably cause when we started my daughter and nephews were younger and I ran the game as good guys vs. monsters.

I certainly have had bad humans ~ highwaymen, thieves, bandits, etc. but they were not killers.

Having said all that, I could definitely see some issues if gaming with adults who come from all different religions and experiences. Those things I would try to keep out of any paladin discussion to the best of my ability.

I would try keep it good against evil without mention of religion, faith, non-believers, and all those other religious specific words.

I would think that most adventuring parties would sort-of group moderate the behavior of paladins should they become too extreme or fanatical.

[alcyone]

Some of the things mentioned could go in a checklist on a character sheet, that the character makes up or that is defined by the deity or lawgiver. I suggest a checklist and not a 20 page manifesto, because it should be easy for the CK to go through it very quickly and weigh a situation.

For many things the struggle to do the right thing and make black and white decisions in a grey world is what makes the Paladin interesting. Crises of faith and lapses in judgment shouldn't necessarily result in a permanent loss of paladin abilities, only a deliberate turning away should cause that.

Of course, if your players are philosophers, do not engage when they try to justify their actions; keep it simple or nothing good will come of it.

[Arduin]

For example, would a Paladin torture in order to save the lives of innocents? Would a Paladin use poison? Can they use Poisons to paralyze and capture, but not kill?

Much of that has to do with a Code of Honor rather than good/evil. (That's part of the lawful side). Go back just two centuries and you had Gentlemen that would watch innocents and indeed, even themselves die rather that commit a breach of honor. Unless your player can understand that and detach themselves from today's world in that regard, they won't ever get how to play that type of character from that era.

[Tadhg]

Of course, if your players are philosophers, do not engage when they try to justify their actions; keep it simple or nothing good will come of it.

Didja hear this one:

"A rules lawyer, philosopher and munchkin walk into a C&C game . . . "

[Lurker]

....

A paladin that’s not lawful good never quite feels right to me. At a con I just played at, one of the PCs was a paladin, and essentially tortured and waterboarded the main villain, once he had been captured. That just didn’t sit right with me.

I don't want to be a pain here, so keep that in mind as you read my reply ... Define torture ... and then define it in an era that the game is in, then define it in a world that has true evil -demons devils undead, brutal unremorseful monsters - orcs, goblins, bugbears, and godly powers that truly walk the earth. Now define the tools one that personifies good and just would use to fight those evils. Also remember, the lawful belief of 'eye for an eye' is followed.

With that, I'd argue that a paladin would - when needed - be harsh and brutal. Will a paladin lop of a hand, crack an arm, etc etc ... yes, when needed. Will they act as judge jury and executioner (as tree pointed out) yes if there is none other to do so, and they would do it without hesitation.

Would we, setting in our safe sanitized world, call that torture, brutal, evil. maybe. But, I'd argue those are tools a paladin would use.

That said, would he enjoy it (harsh brutal methods), or would it be his first choice ... no. Also, are there things that would be beyond the pale that a paladin wouldn't do, yes.

Much of that has to do with a Code of Honor rather than good/evil. (That's part of the lawful side). Go back just two centuries and you had Gentlemen that would watch innocents and indeed, even themselves die rather that commit a breach of honor. Unless your player can understand that and detach themselves from today's world in that regard, they won't ever get how to play that type of character from that era.

Rgr that on detachment from this time and mind set.

Didja hear this one:

"A rules lawyer, philosopher and munchkin walk into a C&C game . . . "

Do tell ...

[DMSamuel]

Of course, if your players are philosophers, do not engage when they try to justify their actions; keep it simple or nothing good will come of it.

Didja hear this one:

"A rules lawyer, philosopher and munchkin walk into a C&C game . . . "

The tavernkeep said "We don't serve your kind here" and pointed to the door.


Then the Prysmal Eye showed up and everyone died. The end.

[Tadhg]

Of course, if your players are philosophers, do not engage when they try to justify their actions; keep it simple or nothing good will come of it.

Didja hear this one:

"A rules lawyer, philosopher and munchkin walk into a C&C game . . . "

The tavernkeep said "We don't serve your kind here" and pointed to the door.


Then the Prysmal Eye showed up and everyone died. The end.

OMGosh is that funny!!!

[Jyrdan Fairblade]

I suppose I should have mentioned that the villain had submitted to capture without a fight.

Naturally, the other player is free to play their paladin the way they like. But to me, like I said, a paladin should be both lawful and good. He should strive to be better than the standard murderhobo adventurer. Torture was an expedience, a compromise to those ideals. A paladin may be harsh and brutal, but I don't think they would intentionally inflict suffering. A swift death is one thing, but prolonged torment is another.

I don't want to be a pain here, so keep that in mind as you read my reply ... Define torture ... and then define it in an era that the game is in, then define it in a world that has true evil -demons devils undead, brutal unremorseful monsters - orcs, goblins, bugbears, and godly powers that truly walk the earth. Now define the tools one that personifies good and just would use to fight those evils. Also remember, the lawful belief of 'eye for an eye' is followed.

With that, I'd argue that a paladin would - when needed - be harsh and brutal. Will a paladin lop of a hand, crack an arm, etc etc ... yes, when needed. Will they act as judge jury and executioner (as tree pointed out) yes if there is none other to do so, and they would do it without hesitation.

Would we, setting in our safe sanitized world, call that torture, brutal, evil. maybe. But, I'd argue those are tools a paladin would use.

That said, would he enjoy it (harsh brutal methods), or would it be his first choice ... no. Also, are there things that would be beyond the pale that a paladin wouldn't do, yes.

[Lurker]

I suppose I should have mentioned that the villain had submitted to capture without a fight.

Naturally, the other player is free to play their paladin the way they like. But to me, like I said, a paladin should be both lawful and good. He should strive to be better than the standard murderhobo adventurer. Torture was an expedience, a compromise to those ideals. A paladin may be harsh and brutal, but I don't think they would intentionally inflict suffering. A swift death is one thing, but prolonged torment is another.

See, that may be a little different. Even I agree 'torture' for a paladin should never be an expedience nor prolonged ... at best it is a distasteful last resort. And, one that should last only as long as needed.

You know, something came up a while back in Rigon's FR game. A whole passel of bad guys we fought and killed. The city had various clerics us 'speak with dead' on the corpses. This opens a bit of opportunity to a paladin and a cleric in the party ... 'tell me now, or you will tell me later, the path you take is your choice'.

Especially if the bad guy is BAD, eye for an eye and life for life etc. Someone that did great evil deeds would not/should not expect to be treated kindly by a defender of good. One that rapes kills pillages etc will not receive an easy death. Look at Roman law and punishments ... crucification was made to be long painful and in full view of all. Using that as a basis, a paladin has some brutal tools to use when needed. He can even look at it as step 1 in the eternal punishment of the bad guy. A quick easy clean death is for those that were honorable even if they were enemies.

That said, the paladin should not take that path for simple enjoyment and the bad guy should be given multiple opportunities to chose a path that doesn't force the paladin to be that harsh.


Wow, reading this it sounds like I'm telling you 'your wrong' ... I don't mean it that way. It's your world, play it as you like and how you and your players enjoy.

I'm just trying to defend/explain my view on paladins not being good without teeth, or the teeth the paladin has as the sheep dog protecting the good.

[Treebore]

You guys are proving my point about not seeing eye to eye, which is why I say don't blind side Paladin players, have them explain, ask questions based on your view, and then let them know what their action, if taken, will likely lead to.

[serleran]

I like to run them with trolls, demons, or worse chasing quickly behind.

[Lurker]

I like to run them with trolls, demons, or worse chasing quickly behind.

[Jyrdan Fairblade]

Don't worry, I did not take it that way at all. Merely a discussion as to the nature of paladins. And yes, Treebore is right, there's no one way to play a paladin. If every paladin had to be the same, no one would play them (probably why you saw so few cavaliers in the 1e era, when that code of honor they had practically made them all the same; that and that their code gave most of them very short lives).

Wow, reading this it sounds like I'm telling you 'your wrong' ... I don't mean it that way. It's your world, play it as you like and how you and your players enjoy.

I'm just trying to defend/explain my view on paladins not being good without teeth, or the teeth the paladin has as the sheep dog protecting the good.

[Arduin]

You guys are proving my point about not seeing eye to eye, which is why I say don't blind side Paladin players, have them explain, ask questions based on your view, and then let them know what their action, if taken, will likely lead to.

Haven't seen a GM "blind side" a player like that in decades when some kid was running a game. Most of the problems I've run into was where a player was given the guidelines and also wanted to eat his cake because otherwise they would miss out on something like money or magic.

[Treebore]

You guys are proving my point about not seeing eye to eye, which is why I say don't blind side Paladin players, have them explain, ask questions based on your view, and then let them know what their action, if taken, will likely lead to.

Haven't seen a GM "blind side" a player like that in decades when some kid was running a game. Most of the problems I've run into was where a player was given the guidelines and also wanted to eat his cake because otherwise they would miss out on something like money or magic.

There are "kids" in the "adult" world.

[dachda]

My problem with this discussion is the rather disproven notion that torture will successfully retrieve any sort of useful information from its victims. Study after study show that is only eeffective use is as punishment. This can be shown historically. Check out this: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 01303.html. Proper interrogation technique does not in the slightest rely upon torture and the testimony of any one person is always backed up by info from other sources. In fact, torture is probably more likely to get you erroneous info, because the person who doesn't know the answer to the question is more likely to make something up to get the torture over with, than the person who does know the answer is likely to tell it. So how would you ever know you got a true answer without checking it against other sources anyway. So why would you torture. And please don't give me the ticking time bomb scenario, that is just a lot of cr#p. Even if such a scenario could exist, you could no more trust the answer given by the torture victim than you could without the ticking time bomb.

So I think it would be quite easy to say a Paladin has been trained by his Order and his Temple/Church in proper interrogation techniques, and by using his/her high charisma, and a kind of stockholm syndrome interrogation echnique that the paladin will get a true answer. So any torture would be breaking his vows. Think about it, a goblin is always the victim of brutal harsh treatment by his superiors. He will be virtually immune to receiving such treatment by a paladin. But how would a goblin react to kindess, good food, and a friendly voice? He'd turn on his kind in a hot minute.

That's what a Paladin would do, none of this torture nonsense.

[Captain_K]

I like keeping them "honest" and "kind", slow to anger, quick to protect.. but human (or non-human as the CK decides).. when they sin.. they sin big.. they get blood on their hands, lots of blood.. that is why they pray, they pray for forgiveness, that is why the spell Atonement was written... they do not have to be perfect all the time. They must preach love and forgiveness for they need it..

OK, so that is one way to play a Paladin in my past.. the other way was slap stick, Dudley Do Right type who played Lawful stupid to a T with his much smarter holy steed - a Unicorn who kept him from getting killed all the time.

[Treebore]

My problem with this discussion is the rather disproven notion that torture will successfully retrieve any sort of useful information from its victims. Study after study show that is only eeffective use is as punishment. This can be shown historically. Check out this: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 01303.html. Proper interrogation technique does not in the slightest rely upon torture and the testimony of any one person is always backed up by info from other sources. In fact, torture is probably more likely to get you erroneous info, because the person who doesn't know the answer to the question is more likely to make something up to get the torture over with, than the person who does know the answer is likely to tell it. So how would you ever know you got a true answer without checking it against other sources anyway. So why would you torture. And please don't give me the ticking time bomb scenario, that is just a lot of cr#p. Even if such a scenario could exist, you could no more trust the answer given by the torture victim than you could without the ticking time bomb.

So I think it would be quite easy to say a Paladin has been trained by his Order and his Temple/Church in proper interrogation techniques, and by using his/her high charisma, and a kind of stockholm syndrome interrogation echnique that the paladin will get a true answer. So any torture would be breaking his vows. Think about it, a goblin is always the victim of brutal harsh treatment by his superiors. He will be virtually immune to receiving such treatment by a paladin. But how would a goblin react to kindess, good food, and a friendly voice? He'd turn on his kind in a hot minute.

That's what a Paladin would do, none of this torture nonsense.

While I completely agree on what your saying, Paladins do not have all these studies available to them, so have to go with the knowledge of their time/world. So if your the CK, and you also make it known that Torture is considered a ineffective tool, then a Paladin definitely should not engage in it. Personally, I think Detect Lie is a far more effective Interrogation tool. Then again, I am married to an ex Army Interrogator.

[Treebore]

Also, players of Paladins in my game also like to make use of their CHA. Like my daughter is currently playing a Runemark/Paladin (My Runemark, not from the Rune Lore book). She likes to cast Enhance Attribute, which gets her CHA into the god like range, then Charm them, and use a combination of the Charm spell and her "natural Charm" to get them to divulge the info needed. Well, "his", she is playing a male Paladin that worships Osahar. So between the Charm Person making the prisoner inclined to like the spell caster, and then the caster successfully using their own natural charm, they typically get any info they need.

[Lurker]

Dachda

Unfortunately, with the teams I was on in the military, I learned the lesson the hard way that torture, when applied properly by someone that knows what they are doing does work.

Those schools that start out with a bag being tied over you head and end ... eventually. Everyone breaks and goes through them to learn they will break, how to tell when they are on the edge of breaking, and how to limit the damage when you do break.

Even in those schools, discomfort to the edge of torture is used (with the knowledge the bad guys will not hesitate to cross over that line in a heart beat) for a reason. Additionally, like Dachda mentioned kindness is also used, hand in hand with the torture. Good cop bad cop to the 10th degree.

However, Like you mention, people will admit to things to stop the torture. Also, the testimony of 1 should be backed up by other testimony and facts.

With that, torture isn't used willy nilly. For a nug that doesn't know much, not much is asked. For one that does more than likely have info, game on. Plus their answers are always checked against what is known what others say and what the answer was to the same question the day before.

That is all part of the integration game ... The key is having someone know how to balance the carrot and the stick.

Oh, there are times that make me twitch just thinking about it ...

I was lucky, I was great at playing dumb. ... no use in beating someone that is confused dumb etc etc etc. But even then it only last so long ...

CK

Good point on the atonement ... I agree. A paladin that does use it as a tool may not be punished by their god/goddess, but they will feel the need to correct the stain on their soul a bit.

Dudley do right, lawful stupid ... Ack ... I could never play a paladin like that. But, it would be fun to see someone run one like that and do a good job of it. I couldn't pull it off but it would be fun to watch!

Tree, Rgr on detect lie being so useful. I shutter to think about how things in those schools would have gone if right next to the gater was a cleric with a detect lie turned on. Sooooo much for me playing stupid. I'd have spent a lot more time with Ivan ...

For high Cha, also rgr. To me that is why the Paladin should be playing the good cop asking the questions and going 'I hate the thought of what bob here is going to do to you if you lie once more ... please help me help you'. But to me, even if the paladin isn't the one getting ready to kidney punch the guy with the bag on his head, he is still using torture by the shear fact that is going to be the next step in the dance. He may not be breaking a tib/fib but he is culpable. Plus the paladin should be the leader & (as you so well put it) moral compass of the party. He will have to pay a price for his & his party's actions.

[dachda]

Lurker,
Are you talking about training like in #5 of the article I linked to above?

Dachda

Unfortunately, with the teams I was on in the military, I learned the lesson the hard way that torture, when applied properly by someone that knows what they are doing does work.

Those schools that start out with a bag being tied over you head and end ... eventually. Everyone breaks and goes through them to learn they will break, how to tell when they are on the edge of breaking, and how to limit the damage when you do break.

Even in those schools, discomfort to the edge of torture is used (with the knowledge the bad guys will not hesitate to cross over that line in a heart beat) for a reason. Additionally, like Dachda mentioned kindness is also used, hand in hand with the torture. Good cop bad cop to the 10th degree.

However, Like you mention, people will admit to things to stop the torture. Also, the testimony of 1 should be backed up by other testimony and facts.

With that, torture isn't used willy nilly. For a nug that doesn't know much, not much is asked. For one that does more than likely have info, game on. Plus their answers are always checked against what is known what others say and what the answer was to the same question the day before.

That is all part of the integration game ... The key is having someone know how to balance the carrot and the stick.

Oh, there are times that make me twitch just thinking about it ...

I was lucky, I was great at playing dumb. ... no use in beating someone that is confused dumb etc etc etc. But even then it only last so long ...

CK

[Lurker]

In a way, but not realy. You aren't taught how to resist the pain/torture. As a point you are taught you can't resist it for extended periods. Yes resist it for as long as you can. Embrace it to the point you can, but you will break. At that point the focus in the training is actually on becoming an onion ... you resist and then break. But let them only get info out of layer one. Then mentally recover from breaking and get ready for round 2 ... resist, an hour, a day a few days but again you will break. give them layer 1 again and hope they don't push into layer 2 ... wash rinse repeat.

However, it is right in that the individual is the key determinant. Also, what works to easily crack me won't work for prisoner x & y. But what gets to y only makes x twitch a little but I can all but sleep through it . One guy can take punches and pain all day. But you let a snake slither by him and ... another can take the water games but then you slap him (not even a punch but a slap) and... everyone has their button and it will be found and pushed.

I'd also say that full up, balls to the wall pain and permit damage does become counter productive. But the lead up to the edge of that pain is a scary thing. With that, the best line form the article is in point 2, torture is good for intimidation but not information. But I'd add that the process of intimidation can easily lay the seeds for information. That used correctly, with time, and with a good gator ...

That said, if you are getting to that level of realism in a game ...

[Treebore]

In a way, but not realy. You aren't taught how to resist the pain/torture. As a point you are taught you can't resist it for extended periods. Yes resist it for as long as you can. Embrace it to the point you can, but you will break. At that point the focus in the training is actually on becoming an onion ... you resist and then break. But let them only get info out of layer one. Then mentally recover from breaking and get ready for round 2 ... resist, an hour, a day a few days but again you will break. give them layer 1 again and hope they don't push into layer 2 ... wash rinse repeat.

However, it is right in that the individual is the key determinant. Also, what works to easily crack me won't work for prisoner x & y. But what gets to y only makes x twitch a little but I can all but sleep through it . One guy can take punches and pain all day. But you let a snake slither by him and ... another can take the water games but then you slap him (not even a punch but a slap) and... everyone has their button and it will be found and pushed.

I'd also say that full up, balls to the wall pain and permit damage does become counter productive. But the lead up to the edge of that pain is a scary thing. With that, the best line form the article is in point 2, torture is good for intimidation but not information. But I'd add that the process of intimidation can easily lay the seeds for information. That used correctly, with time, and with a good gator ...

That said, if you are getting to that level of realism in a game ...

Torture can only work if your torturing the person who has the info you need. NOTHING gained from someone who is tortured is reliable, until as you point out, it is collaborated with info from other sources. So unless your going to have alternative sources, there is no point to Torture, aside from just doing it. Fortunately, in the worlds of D&D, you have far more reliable ways to go about getting information. None of which involves Torture.

[Arduin]

My problem with this discussion is the rather disproven notion that torture will successfully retrieve any sort of useful information from its victims.

Be careful of "studies" when upon any thoughtful reflection, they contravene basic logic.

dachda, if you hid your automobile and someone tied you down and started cutting off parts of your body until you disclosed its location, would you tell them its location or, stoically refuse? Be honest.

(In other words, if you already haven't figured it out, if the person has data and the interrogator knows what to ask for, valuable data can be obtained.)

[Captain_K]

If they cut off any of me I'd tell them where every car in the world is, even make believe one.. problem is, the folks doing the cutting do not know what to ask, ask too much, and too many questions and cannot tell which answers are real or made up.. the flaw is not in the "logic" of could it work, but in the reality of practice.

In theory, communism works great, its a simple idea, in practice it does not, torture is really only to make the inflictor feel better that they are doing everything in their power to "make something better".. its to fight against the helplessness.. nothing more.

[Treebore]

My problem with this discussion is the rather disproven notion that torture will successfully retrieve any sort of useful information from its victims.

Be careful of "studies" when upon any thoughtful reflection, they contravene basic logic.

dachda, if you hid your automobile and someone tied you down and started cutting off parts of your body until you disclosed its location, would you tell them its location or, stoically refuse? Be honest.

(In other words, if you already haven't figured it out, if the person has data and the interrogator knows what to ask for, valuable data can be obtained.)

You may want to actually read the studies. The person being tortured will tell you anything, sure. But, do they actually know what you want to know? Did they tell you the truth? You won't know until your able to verify it. Plus a certain church has lots of records on torture, telling how many confessed immediately, how long others took, and how some never confessed. So obviously you would be very surprised at how many people can actually resist torture, even completely.

[Lurker]

.... Fortunately, in the worlds of D&D, you have far more reliable ways to go about getting information. None of which involves Torture.

For the most part, yes. High cha - which a paladin worth his salt should have - charm spell, detect lie. All are more useful than torture.

However, I remember a scenario in Waterdeep, with a warerat, and the cleric didn't have detect lie, the little beast wouldn't soften with the good cop routine - I tried 4 times and made good cha checks but still nothing, so we all had to go bad cop. Get what little info he would give us then my Paladin acted as judge jury executioner and the body got dumped in the sewer water . Is it how I wanted the paladin to need to handle the problem, no. I'd have much preferred it if the carrot and nice guy route would have worked. Is it how the little ratfink forced us to do it ... yes.

Even then we still had more questions than answers, but he was a low level nug and we didn't expect too much from him.

[serleran]

Drow are very good at torture. And resisting it.