The Nature of "Lawful"

Reading a thread in Archives last night got me curious as to whether my definition of the Lawful alignment is not, in fact, in the minority. So I thought I'd put up a poll and see just how many people feel the same way as I do, and how many people feel differently.

Here's the scenario. A Lawful-Something fighter lives in a lawless country. The fighter has a strict, disciplined life, and an ordered, rational way of thinking. He believes that pedophilia is wrong, and anyone who commits such an act forfeits his right to live. The fighter spends twenty years in the lawless country, and in that time comes across ten pedophiles, all of whom he kills.

Then the fighter moves to a LG kingdom. Here, pedophilia is a crime punishable by death. Murder is also a crime punishable by death. The fighter encounters another pedophile, and as was the case with every other pedophile he's encountered in his life, he kills him.

Was the act of killing the pedophile a Lawful act, a Chaotic act, or neither?

Non-lawful. The "Lawful" alignment means the individual subscribes to a strict code, but it also, IMO, means that the individual believes that local laws are to be followed. (That doesn't mean follows slavishly. A lawful good character will only follow just laws, for instance.) In this case, the law was just, so it should have been followed.

However, the action was in-line with the character's personal code, so it can't really qualify as chaotic, either.

Frankly, it's almost a moot point, since the character's now guilty of murder by the local laws, and should probably get the heck out of dodge.

This, incidentally, is a perfect example of why the alignment system hast to be at least somewhat flexible. The truth is, there are some actions or circumstances that simply don't fit well into any of the established alignments, even though there are a full nine different categories.

In my games lawful alignement does NOT equal "law-abiding"! That's just one of many possible "lawful"'s...

"Lawful" (usually!) indicates that the character has some sort of code, ethic or philosophy he lives by. This could be anything from a set of personal standards he strives to live up to, to the rules of some guild or order, or the teachings of a particular religion. Of course, it could also be the official laws of the land the character tries to uphold; a dedicated sheriff or policeman would count as lawful.

So IMHO, the murder was a lawful act. The killer followed his personal ethics and did what he had always considered to be the right thing. Even if pedophilia had been legal in that country (though who'd want to raise children there if it was?!? ), I would still consider it a lawful act.

In my eyes, its a chaotic act because despite his lawful attitude (whether for good, neutrality or evil) he willfully went against the laws of the nation he was in to follow his own personal path.

The answer depends upon whether or not the Paladin was aware of the laws. If the Paladin was aware of the laws, then he willfully defied the established authority of the land and performed a chaotic act. Part of being lawful is respecting traditional authority. A character that behaved solely according to his own code, without regard for the world around him would best be described as chaotic.

If, however, the Paladin was ignorant of this law then he has performed a lawful act by acting in accordance with his own code lacking the guidance of an authority.

To come at it from another perspective, a Vigilante is a person who enforces their own penalties for social transgressions without regard to the penalties established by the community (laws). While a Vigilante would have a code that she lives by, she is still Chaotic due to her direct violation of the laws of her community.

Everyone has some sort of code that they live by, whether it's written down or otherwise. Alignment represents more than the character's mind, it represents their place within the multiverse - just like good or evil.

Knoxgamer said:

The answer depends upon whether or not the Paladin was aware of the laws.

Click to expand...

Not a paladin. I don't want to open up that can of worms. Using the P-word skews people's opinions of what's acceptible, etc. etc. Let's stick with what I posted. A plain ol' vanilla Lawful-Something fighter.

To kill someone is not always the act of murdering someone. So in this case I would say lawful, but it may look to others as a chaotic act in the eyes of others if he was to take the said person to the courts of the land to be judged first, one could say chaotic but it would be hard for me to go that way. For if the person did do the crime and the man did go by not only his code but the law of the land, at least for the most part, I would say in truth it would be a lawful if not a neutral act, although it may seem to be a chaotic act on the outside, to all others. Hope that came out how I wanted.

I'd say it was a very strongly Lawful act. Why? Because even though he was violating the local laws, no where in his OWN person code does he strongly believe in following local laws. He followed his personal code to the letter. THAT is seriously lawful.

Assuming he knew of the laws, the act was chaotic. He might have felt it just (as I would also) but it was still unlawful in the sense that he failed to follow the laws of the land. A lawful character (hehe...almost used the term paladin) might not always agree with them, but unless they are totally egregious, a lawful character is still forced to abide to them out of respect for law, tradition, and society. And since, in this country, pediophilia is punishable by death, it would likely not be that bad to him.

Hence, he took the law into his own hands and became that vigilante that values individual initiative against the order of laws.