Custom Path of Enlightenment

Path of Undying Justice

Nickname: Vigilantes

 

Lamech said to his wives:

 

 

- Genesis 4:23-24, the “Song of the Sword” (NKJV)

 

The core of the vigilante’s unlife consists of the pursuit of justice, or, perhaps more accurately, the pursuit of retribution taken against injustice. Of course, this simply raises the question of what justice, or injustice, itself consists of. While the path does not prescribe any one code of justice, those who follow it, being Cainites, are likely to come up with a variety of uniquely inhuman codes which, when violated, obligate the vigilante to take retribution on the violator. Despite this ideological variety, those who walk the path universally acknowledge two particular aspects of retribution, directly related to one another, as both undeniably true and undeniably important.

 

First, retribution exists as an end in itself. To rephrase Orwell: “The purpose of retribution is retribution.” Any lesson which the recipient learns, or any unfair advantage leveled, in the process of retribution is not, ultimately, the focus of the path, although the adherent may very well still be concerned with these things. 

 

Second, the vigilante takes retribution through the application of punishment. He does not merely inflict punishment. Note that, when one takes retribution, one becomes both the subject and the object of the action. The follower of the path acts ultimately for his own, personal sense of justice, and the consequences of his actions upon others become secondary concerns. In contrast, when one merely inflicts punishment, the person on whom punishment is inflicted becomes the object, and subsequently this person overshadows the vigilante’s sense of justice, resulting in a perversion of priorities. As the path instructs its adherents to cultivate and enforce their own personal standard of justice above all else, the vigilante must always remember to take retribution, with punishment as the means. To mistake this means with the end is to effectively abandon the path.

 

In light of the self-centered nature of retribution, it should not be surprising that the freshest of followers seem to act as if injustice simply means whatever happens to piss them off. Yet, after a while, this impulsive conception of justice fades away, leaving room for a myriad of unique, philosophical ideas which can be tested in action or in thought. As more and more of these are found wanting, the adherent refines his standard of justice, and, in doing so, continually creates newer and better codes of conduct which he expects himself, and everyone else, to follow.

 

Indeed, this process reflects, or perhaps causes, a general trend among the followers of the path, who begin as relatively lawless vigilantes and advance to become administrators of their very own law, magistrates. The key difference between these two classes of adherents arises from their duties: The former only needs to seek justice in his very own unlife, while the latter, by definition, offers to enforce his law for others as well. Thus, when the average vigilante is approached by an ally who asks for direct assistance concerning some situation, he may very well refuse, but the magistrate has the distinct duty to offer justice to all who ask for it. 

 

Of course, those who ask a magistrate for assistance should be wary of the consequences. A path follower may very well assess the situation only to find that the ally was the truly unjust one here, and consequently take retribution upon that ally. Paragons of justice must not, after all, permit any unjustified bias, although the less enlightened servants of justice have some leeway in the matter.

 

Indeed, the pragmatic side of the path must be highlighted, lest one get the impression that the followers of Undying Justice must be starry-eyed idealists. Just as those lower on the path may be able to harbor some bias, they also may be able to spend exceedingly long amounts of time actually taking retribution for any single injustice. Consider the neonate who only has the power to rebalance the scales with his sire after decades of development. These lenient standards are adequate for those who have not yet achieved the power to enforce justice swiftly and without bias, but once an adherent has obtained this power, his obligation to pursue justice forces him to enact retribution more effectively. Justice seems quite meritocratic: promotion comes when one has the ability to conduct a higher calling. 

 

However, beyond even these practical allowances, which are slowly diminished as one advances on the path, there are more permanent duties which prove that the path does not really endorse idealism. In general, the vigilante’s goal should be to take retribution as effectively as possible. This means that one has a duty, consequentialist in nature, to use whatever means necessary to maximize retribution. Take, for instance, the duty which all followers of the path have to remain in the world of the living. This duty even extends to other vigilantes, as they have also devoted their unlife to justice (one opts for punishments such as torture or impairment rather than execution when taking retribution on other vigilantes). As losing a servant of justice for any single retribution can only be inefficient, martyrdom in the path is strictly prohibited, barring extraordinary circumstances. Yes, those who follow the path of Undying Justice have their ideals, but they certainly act like pragmatists, rather than idealists.

 

 

5 Refusing to serve as magistrate Failing to enact swift retribution   

4 Refusing to instruct allies about justice Acting on an unjustified bias   

3 Killing another on the path Failing to guide a frenzy   

2 Acting on or encouraging mercy Putting personal concerns above duty   

1 Ignoring or pardoning an injustice Killing for any purpose other than retribution

 

 

As the Path of Undying Justice itself seems little-known, only a few individuals have any solid information concerning its foundation and history. Those few who do must have made acquaintance with the path’s founder, a Salubri Antitribu who calls himself Lamech. This Salubri himself has only existed for about a dozen years, so the path is extraordinarily young. 

 

Perhaps more interesting than it’s youth is the method by which it had been created. After all, it appears that most path founders wander purposeless for decades, if not centuries, before accumulating enough knowledge in order to craft their very own way of life. It seems impossible to have forged a path of enlightenment in less than a decade. 

 

Lamech does not claim to have ever undergone any period of confusion in his unlife. Instead, he explains the process of creating a path in terms of the Sabbat’s Creation Rites. Just as a newfound recruit may emerge from a grave of dirt following, say, the Path of Honorable Accord, Lamech had been reborn into the world imbued with a new, distinctly retributive purpose. He thinks of it as no great feat; he simply discovered a new way to coexist with the Beast.

 

Currently, Lamech hopes to instruct others in the path, increasing the number of adherents and, thus, ultimately increasing the amount of justice in the world.

 

Any follower of the Path of Undying Justice should focus his unlife on taking retribution by inflicting punishment on the unjust. All punishments would ideally inform the transgressor of his transgression, be swift, and cause much harm to that transgressor. Generally speaking, any harm will do, but in practice three general fields of punishment may arise: execution, torture, and impairment. In other words, the vigilante will either kill the unjust, inflict pain on the unjust, or in some way limit the unjust. Traditionally, mortal societies have relied upon impairment, whether by utilizing prisons or by chopping off hands. 

 

Adherents will differentiate themselves, in part, by choosing and specializing in the various aspects of punishment. For instance, Lamech prioritizes harmfulness over the other two ideal functions of punishment, and specializes in administering torture. Another Vigilante may prefer swift executions, and yet another may prefer very informative impairments. Nonetheless, all vigilantes will share one commonality: their punishment will seem disproportionate to those who have not been initiated in the ways of justice. 

 

In fact, the vigilante’s standard of justice will almost always include proportionate punishment. It’s just that even the slightest of violations will warrant a harsh penalty. So, a lesser violation, like perhaps lying, might warrant a fair bit of pain, but a greater violation, like perhaps stealing, would warrant a full-blown torture session. This is in part because the Beast with which the vigilante cooperates motivates him reak havoc on the unjust. Thus, retribution, for the enlightened, consists of what could be considered excessive punishments. This is what an adherent’s standard of justice demands of him.

 

Yet, there may be one more reason why a vigilante can give seemingly disproportionate punishment. Simply put, vigilantes often do give such punishment. Beyond mere mistakes, the path encourages its followers to inflict truly excessive punishment and take retribution on themselves later for this excessiveness, rather than to inflict an inappropriately lenient punishment. Thus, taking retribution on oneself becomes a common enough practice, and each individual vigilante may end up creating unique rituals for the process.

 

All humans understand the basic passion to distribute justice. A father does not think of any greater goods when he obliterates his daughter’s rapist. Some individuals feel this motivation at the core of their being, as a key aspect of their identity. Perhaps the Catholic Church would condemn them as “wrathful”, but these individuals, in turn, probably wouldn’t care much for the Christian idea of “turning the other cheek”. It is the passion for justice which underlies the existence of all vigilantes, and thus these sorts of individuals are the most likely to become adherents of the Path of Undying Justice after the Embrace.

 

In order for any Cainite to adopt a path, he must undergo various trials which both serve to test his worthiness and to strip away whatever morality he had in the past. For potential vigilantes, these trials serve to fan the flames of this passion for justice, until this passion consumes and replaces all others. Any past passion, whether it be platonic, romantic, or religious, can only now be seen through the flickering flames of justice. Comrades, lovers, and even God himself can only remain important so long as they abide by one’s standards of justice. 

 

Considering how deep the passion for justice infiltrates all other passions, it should not be surprising that many newly initiated adherents will simply abandon those other passions. Who needs camaraderie, love, or spirituality when one has wrath? Indeed, those who surrender completely to justice are those who will advance farthest in the path. They lose all temptations towards mercy, towards unjustified bias, towards even their own personal concerns. Their duty as a servant of justice sums up the whole of their unlife.

 

Perhaps the most worrying of sins, mercy consists of a very human action, in which one diminishes the punishment that a transgressor will receive. It is anathema to the path. A vigilante who is merciful is a contradiction in terms. However, a vigilante may certainly appear merciful, if this facade ultimately assists him in taking retribution on the transgressor in question. For instance, a cunning vigilante could assist a transgressor multiple times and acquire his trust, only to backstab him at the most important of times. 

 

Thus, on rare occasions, a follower of the Path of Undying Justice may appear kind, while truly acting on his passion for justice. For the most part, however, the vigilantes don’t feel the need to pretend to be anything other than what they truly are: monstrous, unempathetic judges. 

 

 

 

           Here, let bias be defined as broadly as possible, with it meaning partiality for one agent or group of agents and against another agent or group of agents. One may notice that such a definition includes a diverse variety of phenomena. However, a vigilante should only feel the compulsion to avoid unjustified biases. The adherent may act upon justified biases freely, but, then, what determines which biases are justified and which are not? A bias may be justified if it meets one of two basic criteria: practicality or generalizability. 

            A bias is practically justifiable if the follower believes that he could not function effectively without it, or if the bias would place a unrealizable burden on the follower. Consider, for instance, the bias that a vigilante may have towards agents who happen to be in his proximity. It may seem a bit arbitrary to act on individuals who are closer to you, rather than those who are far away, but one must divert one’s resources somewhere, and the most practical place to do so is simply in one’s proximity. 

             A bias is also justifiable if the follower believes that some systematic difference exists between agents or groups of agents which is relevant to his standard of justice. On the most basic level, this means that vigilantes may, of course, judge others. It cannot be said to be unjustifiably biased for the vigilante to consider one person moral and another immoral. This appears to become more complicated, however, when groups are involved. 

             Consider the following questions. Is it unjustifiably biased to prefer one clan over another? To prefer one’s species over another? To refuse to speak to an ex-lover merely because he is an ex-lover? In all of these cases, there are systematic differences between the groups. The question becomes: are these systematic differences relevant when considering the vigilante’s standard of justice? 

             It seems unlikely that another’s status as “ex-lover” will be relevant. On the other hand, it seems clear that there are important differences between Cainites and humans. The first have the Beast and supernaturally capabilities, as well as potentially eternal life. The blood of Cain flows through them, and the Cainites seem paradoxically closer to and farther away from God. Any of these reasons could factor into a vigilante’s standard of justice and, thus, justify a bias for Cainites and against humankind.

              Another example comes from the sects. A Sabbat devotee may have a justified bias against Camarilla members because those members, he believes, serve the Antediluvians. If his standard of justice deems that these ancient vampires are unjust, and that whoever serves them is unjust as well, then most Camarilla members would seem to be unjust, and thus he would have a justified bias against them.

              Ultimately, it must be up to players and storytellers to ensure that what should be a relatively strict path sin remains a potent force in the characters unlife. Only so many biases can be justified before the path sin becomes meaningless, and Cainites make mistakes all of the time. A path should never be easy to walk, and being without unjustified biases should limit a character significantly, as well as provide interesting internal conflicts.

 

There exist two sides of the Path of Undying Justice. First, there is the scholarly, passive side, with which the adherent formulates and refines a standard of justice. Second, there is the passionate, activist side, with which the adherent actually lives out that standard. Both sides are necessary for the follower to walk down the path, but each individual is likely to develop a unique combination of the two, with which they flourish best. For instance, Lamech has been known to disappear for months at a time in order to meditate on matters of import. 

 

Altogether, then, each vigilante must make sure to figure out which of his talents are most suitable in the pursuit of justice, and to capitalize upon them. If forced to choose between the swiftness of the retribution, the harmfulness of it, or the information he gives to the receiver of it, which will he prioritize? What mode of punishment will he specialize in: execution, torture, or impairment? Will he lean more towards the scholarly side of the path, or the activist side? What does justice, and thus injustice, consist of? None can answer these questions but the individual himself, and the answers are never as stable as one would hope.

 

Characters who follow the Path of Undying Justice must cultivate their Instinct as well as their Conviction. 

 

As combat is perhaps the most difficult part of following the path, a vigilante should consider developing his Physical traits as well as the basic combat abilities: Brawl, Melee, Dodge, and Survival. In addition, he may wish to find abilities which complement whatever method of punishment he prefers.

 

The vigilante should ensure that he has an adequate method of punishment. Potence, in particular, comes to mind, but clever uses of other disciplines, such as Obfuscate, may also be important. Certain powers of the blood will be particularly appropriate, such as the Burning Touch of the Salubri Antitribu.

 

 

Path 1: Sin A) “Ignoring or pardoning an injustice” The vigilante must path check if he either 

refuses to acknowledge a violation of his standards of justice or if he refuses to

acknowledge that he must take retribution on the violator.

 

Sin B) “Killing for any purpose other than retribution” Note that this does not mean that

one cannot kill an innocent. One can kill anyone, anywhere, at any time, so long

as it ultimately helps one take retribution. If one does kill an innocent, however,

one should also take retribution upon oneself. Accidentally killing others does not

cause one to path check, as one did not kill for any purpose at all in such cases.

 

Path 2: Sin A) “Acting on or encouraging mercy” This is very much like the first path sin (1A), 

but a bit stricter in spirit. One acts on mercy if one applies too little punishment

without any intent to fully punish the transgressor later. One encourages mercy

when one encourages others to apply too little punishment on those who have

violated one’s standards of justice. Note that one does not care about others’

standards of justice.This path check is not relevant in situations where too much

punishment is inflicted, although the vigilante should rebalance the scales with

whoever does inflict excessive punishment, even if it is himself.

 

Sin B) “Putting personal concerns above duty” A vigilante has three duties: to survive, to

continually refine his standard of justice, and to take retribution. The follower must path check if he indulges in personal concerns at the cost of one of these duties.

Path 3: Sin A) “Killing another on the path” Pretty straight forward. If the vigilante finds out 

later that someone he killed was another vigilante, he must path check then.

Sin B) “Failing to guide a frenzy” This means that a path check occurs if the vigilante

attempted to guide a frenzy and failed. It does not occur if the vigilante does not actually attempt to guide a frenzy, as he may choose to do in cases where he has more than double the amount of Instinct as compared to the level of the frenzy challenge.

 

Path 4: Sin A) “Refusing to instruct allies about justice” This simply means that the vigilante 

cannot refuse to talk about his own standards of justice with whoever he happens

to consider an ally, if that ally asks. Of course, he need not instruct that ally 

immediately. He can wait for a suitable time and place.

 

Sin B) “Acting on an unjustified bias” See “Some Words Concerning Bias”

 

Path 5: Sin A) “Refusing to serve as magistrate” This requires that the vigilante, who has by 

now actually become a magistrate, accept all requests for him to assess a situation 

and then apply his standard of justice to it. To refuse any such request would

result in a path check. The adherent must make whatever effort possible to follow up on the request. Assessing a situation adequately can take anywhere from two seconds to a few years. A situation is adequately assessed when the magistrate

believes that he knows the gist of what occurred. Note, here, that the magistrate’s

duty is to both assess and judge a certain situation. If someone requests that you do only one of these tasks, or to do even more tasks, then the magistrate may feel free to deny that someone. 

Sin B) “Failing to enact swift retribution” Here, this means that, after assessing a 

situation adequately, the vigilante/magistrate must apply his standard of justice, 

taking retribution in the process, within two months. 

 

 

 

- Written by Wyatt M. McDaniel

(Modeled after entries in Chaining the Beast)