Posted by Citizen Kane on March 22, 2000 at 14:57:56:
I should say, I seriously doubt any imm anath'd any mortal solely because of this. I give the imms much more credit than that.
"quest there isn't so there is no good roleplaying way to solve the quest."
There's a couple bad things here. First is the utter lack of shades of gray. Nobody does, or should, start out a Scarabaeus or Istendil. At level 7, being evil you're mowing down dockworkers and prophets by the dozen, but how is it out of role that you'd take a quest to escape the monotony of whacking a few more forest creatures? Every act is supposed to be of preconceived foul intent? That breeds caricatures.
Also in this case it's reasonable to assume the bard and the princess will give a reward. Not written out, no, but it'd be a good assumption. If I hadn't gotten a reward afterward, and I were evil, I'd simply kill the questors out of spite.
And the biggest thing I see wrong is this punishment for "bad roleplay" done so far after the act, before most players have any reason to be excessively 'good' or 'evil'. Cabal imms should judge roleplay as it relates to the cabal and actions done while in the cabal. This was a really lame reason for him to be anath'd. A quest could've been written to shame or punish the guy, but blunt anathema? By a divine source suddenly popping out to bring up a good deed done long before the oath was taken? Before his role is solidified? That's stupid. And it's very unsophisticated, given all the possibilities here... were I an imm out to discourage this, I would write a quest or find some way through mobs to do so. Divine wrath for saving an Elf for boots 40 years past fits the immortal role about as well as saving the Elf fit the mortal's.