Two alignment questions

[LostSoul]

I'm soliciting opinions on two different situations that have come up in recent games.

First one: A young woman (Llallwyn), known to the party, ended up becoming possessed by an evil creature thanks to her own actions. (They tried to save her but failed, almost losing one PC in the process.) She disappeared for a few months while the PCs were off taking care of bigger things.

Later on, the PCs come back to their old stomping grounds. They hear about a seedy little town that has been taken over by a witch. This witch, of course, turns out to be that possessed woman (Llallwyn). The party Paladin, being the crusading sort, felt slightly responsible and wanted to put things right. So they take some time out of their busy schedule to see if they can help out.

They arrive at the witch's mansion and ask to speak with her. She agrees. Alone in a room with the Paladin and the Wizard, she begins mocking them.

"Take one more step towards me, and you'll be responsible for killing hundreds of innocent souls. I've worked my charms on this town and replaced the guards with my own kind. One signal from me and this hell-hole burns."

The Paladin (Theron) steps closer.

Another voice comes out of the witch's mouth. "Theron? Is that you? Please... save me!" It is Llallwyn.

The Paladin stops.

The demon takes over and mocks him. "You little bleep bleep bleep bleep. The one you serve is weak and impotent. There is nothing you can do here. You are going to fail. Just leave you pathetic little bleeps."

The Paladin can't take any more of this. He charges the fifteen feet between and grapples the witch. She screams in a strange Tongue.

The Wizard's owl familiar (McHoots) tells him that a signal arrow just fired off from the mansion's tower. There is a little more activity down there, now.

Grappling with the witch, the Paladin tells her to stop all this. She laughs. Llallwyn's voice comes through once more. "Theron - please - you're hurting me!" The demon laughs. "If you don't stop I will kill her."

The Paladin head butts her, doing a whole bunch of subdual damage. Enough to knock her out. Llallwyn's body falls limp; then a great, black claw rips its way out of her chest and down. A small, black creature rolls out, then extends itself to its full height. Llallwyn's blood gushes out of the mortal wound in her chest.

Outside, the fires began to rise...


Questions: What do you think about the Paladin's actions? Enough to risk his Paladinhood? (I'm just curious - in the campaign he didn't lose his abilities - but I'd like to see reactions)


Situation the second: The party is travelling to a major city in the neighbouring country. They've been warned that local soldiers can be dangerous, especially for foreigners or those who can't pay their way out.

The soldiers stop the party for questioning (at a range of 65 feet). They want to know what an armed knight with an unidentifiable standard is doing. The party is able to Bluff the soldiers into thinking they are just merchants with foreign protection. After a few comments about weak foreign dogs, they agree to let the party pass after they receive a bunch of taxes. (They were asking for about 20 gold; the party had about 150 in total.) The soldiers ride up cautiously.

The party Wizard decides to tell them he has a receipt for the taxes. He tries to Forge a receipt; he fails. The soldier threatens him with arrest unless he can pay his "bail" upfront. The Wizard dithers for a while; the soldier draws his sword to threaten him.

As this point, we roll initiative and the Wizard blasts them all with a perfectly-lined Cone of Cold. This wipes half of them out, and the rest are too weak to put up much of a fight.

Question: The Wizard in question is (was) Good. Given a history of "shooting first, then staring at their cold, lifeless bodies and wondering what questions they could have answered", do you think he should slide to Neutral?

 

[Pielorinho]

First, it's your campaign; given alignment's squishy nature, you'll have to make the decision yourself. Just make sure the players know ahead of time how you're ruling alignment.

Second, the paladin's first situation had no winning answers. He knew a woman was possessed by a malevolent demon; he didn't know whether it was bluffing. If he didn't attack, and it was bluffing, then it would surely do a lot of evil. His attempt to subdue the possessed woman and stop the demon's evil was probably the best thing he could have done, given what he knew about the situation.

Third, the wizard was getting ready to be arrested for not bribing a cop. I wouldn't necessarily consider his actions lawful, but I don't think that in your average D&D universe they'd be anything like evil. People kill ogres every day for lesser sins.

-In fact, I could even make a case that his actions were lawful-compatible. Since the cops were overstepping their boundaries, a lawful person could claim that they'd forfeited their lawful authority to use force; since they were clearly threatening to use force against the mage and friends, he could claim that his actions were self-defense.

Daniel

 

[LostSoul]

Re: Re: Two alignment questions

Second, the paladin's first situation had no winning answers.

Cool, that's what I was going for. I resolved it by asking the player what he thought his character felt. If he thought his character should lose his Paladin abilities, out the window they would go. In the end, he lost a little faith in himself and has stopped Curing Disease and Laying on Hands.

Third, the wizard was getting ready to be arrested for not bribing a cop. I wouldn't necessarily consider his actions lawful, but I don't think that in your average D&D universe they'd be anything like evil. People kill ogres every day for lesser sins.

I think it's his easy-going attitude with mass mayhem and destruction that bothers me. It shows a disrespect for other's lives. Surely a Good character would be willing to part with some money to save lives?

This event, combined with the fact that he's been doing this a lot lately, makes we wonder if I should slip him to Neutral.

-In fact, I could even make a case that his actions were lawful-compatible. Since the cops were overstepping their boundaries, a lawful person could claim that they'd forfeited their lawful authority to use force; since they were clearly threatening to use force against the mage and friends, he could claim that his actions were self-defense.

The concept of an authority that uses its power to serve the people rather than itself hasn't had much light yet in this campaign world. This kind of behaviour is de rigueur. Although I do agree that his actions were self-defense (it was extortion, after all), his cavalier attitude towards the lives of others worries me somewhat.

 

[Maerdwyn]

I say he Paladin did just about the best he could - Llallwyn asked him to save her, and his actions didn't cause her death - the demon did by bursting out of her chest.

In the case of the wizard, I'm not sure. If the taxes were lawfully imposed, then the wizard's deceit was what set this all in motion, and I'd set the blame on him: it was his (or the party's) selfishness which led directly to the deaths of the soldiers.

If these guards were basically acting as highwaymen, OTOH, then he was defending his property. I wouldn't change his alignment in that case - like Pielorinho implied: What's the difference between an ogre demanding you money an threatening bodily harm and a human soldier demanding your money and threatening bodily harm?

 

[LostSoul]

I wouldn't change his alignment in that case - like Pielorinho implied: What's the difference between an ogre demanding you money an threatening bodily harm and a human soldier demanding your money and threatening bodily harm?

I guess the queston is: Are ten lives worth 30 pieces of gold to someone who can spare it?

Forgetting alignment for a moment, it was a bad decision anyways. Now they are outlaws in a foreign land that doesn't take well to individuals challenging the state's authority.

 

[Maerdwyn]

Forgetting alignment for a moment, it was a bad decision anyways. Now they are outlaws in a foreign land that doesn't take well to individuals challenging the state's authority.

See, THAT's what I would focus on, and what I would use to "punish" him with

Anyway, I'm one of those "I scrapped alignment altogether" folks. Instead, I use the Pendragon Traits and Passions system, under which I would have given the Wizard a "check" under his "Cruel" and "Deceitful" scores.

 

[LostSoul]

See, THAT's what I would focus on, and what I would use to "punish" him with

Anyway, I'm one of those "I scrapped alignment altogether" folks. Instead, I use the Pendragon Traits and Passions system, under which I would have given the Wizard a "check" under his "Cruel" and "Deceitful" scores.

It really doesn't matter if he's Good or Neutral in the game. There aren't any Holy or Bane weapons or anything like that. (In fact, it would probably be better for him if he was Evil.) I guess I'm asking because it's my brother and sometimes there's some sibling rivalry. I mean, he killed all my soldiers! It's all good, though.

 

[Dark Helmet]

He ain't Evil, he's my brother

It really doesn't matter if he's Good or Neutral in the game. There aren't any Holy or Bane weapons or anything like that. (In fact, it would probably be better for him if he was Evil.) I guess I'm asking because it's my brother and sometimes there's some sibling rivalry. I mean, he killed all my soldiers! It's all good, though.

If the wizard is only quick to blast badguys, I wouldn't move him towards evil, rather towards chaotic.

And in a related question about the Paladin example, if you're in a campaign with the standard level of magic, where Raise Dead and Resurrection is readily available, would a Paladin risk his alignment if a villain was threatening a hostage and the Paladin killed both the villain and hostage IF he immediately took the hostage's body and had him or her successfully Raised? Would that be treated as a no harm/no foul? After all, murder is basically only considered evil in RL because its permanent. But in a high-magic world would it be that much worse than a Sleep spell or Petrification if it's only temporary?

 

[SableWyvern]

I'm with the general consensus on the wizard (although may first impression was otherwise).

As far as the paladin goes, I personally don't think a no-win situation excuses a paladin. They represent PERFECT lawful good, even if they can't always live up to that. I also recognise that this view is probably harsher than most peoples.

Having said that, unless any of his actions specifically defied anything laid down in his personal code (I don't think it is in contravention of the default one in the PHB), I think he made the choice that should specifically see him KEEP his Paladin abilities. This was a situation that required swift action, and leaving would have given the bad guy opportunity to work his evil. I could understand the paladin not taking immediate action, but would be seriously considering negative ramifications for that decision.

 

[Galfridus]

I agree that the Paladin situation was no-win. That being said, I would have penalized the paladin with some loss of abilities, requiring atonement (but having no other long-term consequences). He let lots of people die without trying to come up with a way to save them. Regardless of the fact that his intentions were the best, he broke the code and needs to pay. Because of the circumstances, his penalty should not be high, but it should be there to serve as a reminder that the code exists for a reason. If you can get around it "because I thought I was doing the right thing," then you are walking the road to chaos.

To be fair, anyone playing a paladin in my game would be aware that that's how I do things, and should be expecting pay this sort of penance at least once in their adventuring career.

As for the wizard: as I see it, the soldiers were being lawful about collecting taxes if they would have accepted a receipt in place of gold. They then caught the wizard at forgery and threatened to arrest him unless they received money. This is not particularly lawful, but it's not evil IMO.

I guess I would rate the wizard's action depending on his motives for taking out the soldiers. If the party was on some vital mission that was being significantly delayed, I could see this as Chaotic Good. If it was just "they are in my way", then we're definitely talking Neutral, perhaps even Evil. I would move him away from Lawful as well, but not from Neutral to Chaotic unless there was a lot of other chaotic behavior.