1. Why? For the precise same reason Kelemvor gets the sun domain here, because it gives greater abilility to combat undead, just like you would expect a Myrkul cleric to have. This would be nice, though it should not be high on the to do list.

2. In faiths and Avatars Myrkul's worshiper's alignments are listed as LN, N, CN, LE, NE and CE

For the server, the only allowed alignments are CE, LE, N, NE. CN and LN are not allowed. I in fact wanted to make my cleric LN, but was unable to do so. Again, not a high priority fix, but it would be nice.

Just because I am supporting this faction and I want the Myrkul all powerful, I support this.

Faiths & Avatars is a 2nd edition source book; I think we use Faiths & Pantheons (3rd Edition) for our deity info. That said, we implement deities as we see fit/are limited by NWN, and in no way implies we go strictly by F&P when it comes to our deities (but we don't necessarily have any desire to use other source books either).

I'm pretty sure improved turning capability can be scripted by deity, and the Sun domain doesn't need to be added for the sole purpose of making this happen. In fact, if that's the only reason Kelemvor has the Sun domain, we should probably take a close look at the turning script.

AScottBay In fact, if that's the only reason Kelemvor has the Sun domain, we should probably take a close look at the turning script.

Faiths and Avatars is a 2e source; EfU, when it comes to setting lore, is 3.x (there are snippets of 3.5 stuff in there). Neutral should not be a valid clerical alignment and I'm very much feeling like suggesting that it be removed from the list. LN will certainly not be an allowed clerical alignment for Myrkul.

Is there a 3x source which lists the alignments of myrkuls clergy?

What have I done! Oh well.

I humbly ask neutral is NOT taken off the list. I do feel there are many strong reasons not to. Myrkul was the god of death for a very, very long time and he may be evil but a number of evil gods have neutral clergy, depending on what their roll is within the faith. Not every Myrkul cleric is animating the dead, for example.

For example, Taloas, Malar, Talona and Umberlee, forces of nature, all have chaotic neutral clerics.

Additionally, for other evil gods, Cyric has CN, Loth has CN, Beshaba has CN, Gargauth has LN, Tiamat has LN, Velsharoon has LN. Heck, Bhaal, Myrkuls old buddy and the god of violent death, has LN clerics, as does Myrkul's old buddy Bane. Every evil drow god has non evil clerics.

Many may Myrkuls as an innevitable force of nature and part of the natural balance. I actually asked about making my cleric neutral before I made them, fearing that it might be seen as not wanting to be evil. I picked neutral because that is how I saw my PC, someone who was day to day concerned mostly with boring low level duties of the church and not so much with the sacrafices of the innocent or animating undead.

Myrkul should get the Undead Domain, see here for the over ride. If he doesn't already have it; but not the Sun Domain.

BookofJob Is there a 3x source which lists the alignments of myrkuls clergy?

I could probably be persuaded to give Myrkul Undeath (is that what you meant?). I don't know any other DM's stance on this.

I did mean the undeath domain actually, yes.

Back to alignments.... Velsharoon is neutral evil, yet has LN clerics, this is more then two steps. Auril is also neutral evil but has LN clerics. Myrkul is NE, true neutral is only one step away. Death, even under myrkul is seen by many as the grear equilizer and many of his followers may see it as innatley fair. There is another god who is NOT neutral, who has neutral clerics. Uthgar is CN but has N clerics.

There are two other NE gods with LN clerics. The original concept for my PC was in fact, LN, but when I saw the server did not have that for clerics I changed the concept accordingly. Many gods violate the one step rule in other ways on EFU. I think neutral makes sense for Myrkul, but if you are going to remove that options, surley you can add in LN for Myrkul, just like Velsharoon and Auril?

Neutral as an alignment covers five options across the law-chaos and good-evil axes. For the purpose of this discussion, we can safely ignore the law-chaos axis, leaving us with LN, TN, and CN.

As I said in my last post, it was more about Myrkul allowing TN clerics than neutral clerics in general I'm against, since it's a specific rule that a cleric may only be TN if their patron is also TN. It has nothing to do with how many steps away TN is. Uthgar is the only partial exception to this rule I can think of, and his clerical alignments are defined by beast totems, of which only one in 11 is TN, rather than his own alignment (and only two totems are not chaotic). On the one step rule in regards to Velsharoon, Auril, and so forth, see my comment on exceptions in my last post. These exceptions are not EfU specific, they are given in 3e sources. For that reason, I would very much not like it at all if we decided to let Myrkul allow LN clerics since not only does it go against canon (and I know we'e no more canon than we want to be, but I'll argue there are reasons Myrkul doesn't canonically allow LN clerics), it would be violating the one step rule, and I can find remarkably few arguments for ever violating the one step rule (not counting heretics, which we don't really support).

Anyway, this is on a tangent. Feel free to make a new thread of you want to keep discussing alignments.

Since this is ultimately our mistake, regardless of whether it's really a mistake or not, I don't think you have much cause to worry that the alignment will be removed. Not yet, at least.

Since you said there is not much cause to worry that the alignment will be removed tommorow, there is no point to argue over it, I will just hope that if there are any changes, that they are a long way away :).

The Lost Empires of Faerun lists the correct domains and clerical allignments for all the dead deities.