[HoE] Re: Templar Observations (Redux)

[John Goff <johngoff@erols.com>]

Steve, man, you ought to change your nickname to "Can't Pin Me Down." ;-)

After the latest round, it sounds like my original impression was probably closer to the
truth. He actually attacked posse members?

Remember, this all my opinion...

No Greater Reward, says I.

It doesn't really matter (again, IMO) what his justifications were if he attacked his fellow
posse members who were _trying_ to defeat the menace. Regardless of his thoughts on the
guilt or innocence of the child--as well as how the player interprets his Templar
duties--presumably, the posse has proven itself worthy of his assistance. Otherwise, how
does he justify traveling/fighting alongside them in the first place. They _were_ fighting
on their own behalf; he turned his sword/pistol/what-have-you on them.

While there may be a gray area as to a Templar's guidelines, Jo pretty clearly states it as
"..the purpose of the Templars is to guard the pilgrims." Pilgrims are "...just good people.
If they're able, they also have to be strong." If his posse isn't composed of "pilgrims" why
does he hang out with them? If they are, then he really stepped on his crank turning his
weapons against them.

If he was so strongly opposed to the posse's plan, he would have been better served looking
for an opportunity to croak the "servitor" later--rather than in the heat of the battle and
when she was protected by his comrades. He could have killed a worthy hero through his
actions--which, BTW, he took of his own free will. That's a step towards Servitorship in my
book.

You said you'd already done the draw for a Servitor mutation and no Joker came up--that's
cool. (Like I mentioned, I don't draw for a Joker--I skip that step entirely and pull for
the mutation. But that's just me.) I would definitely have word reach another Templar who
approaches the character and points out the concerns I noted above. Not a blackball, just
the quiet warning noted on page 39 of TLC.

John Goff