D&D General How do you think each alignment would handle this?

[MNblockhead]

I live in the upper midwest and occasionally Canadian coins sneak into our change. I was visiting Arizona and paid the exact amount, not paying any attention to the fact that I had a Canadian dime. The cashier looked at me like I was trying to rob her at gunpoint ... over a dime. I explained what it was, but had to dig around for an American dime. Like I would try to cheat the store out of a whole 10 cents.

Yep. Not an uncommon occurrence in Minnesota.

My problem is that I travel a lot and sometimes get lazy about switching out cash. I rarely give the wrong currency, because most other countries' currencies are more colorful than the US greenbacks, even the fancier new ones. But I've gotten some weird looks sorting through Euros, Dinar, Riyal, Shillings, and Yen looking for Dollars. I finally bought a wallet with a the divider in the bill-fold portion to keep my USD separate from other currencies. That and I increasingly pay by card or my phone in the US and rarely have to deal with cash in the US these days.

 

[MNblockhead]

How it would play out with some groups I've played with, who obviously didn't overthink these things:

LG - Take the thief to zero hit points and turn him in.

NG - Distract the shopkeep.

CG - Help the thief by stealing more valuable things and sleight of hand adding it to the thief's pockets ("Poor guy needs food. Let me fill his pockets with gold from the till!"). Feels bad when guards latter find the thief holding stolen goods worth a capital offense.

LN - Beat the thief, return the good, beat the shopkeeper for his lack of attention to security, demand the bounty "owed" him.

TN - Too cool to care. Does something completely detached from the encounter the DM set up.

CN - Plant some poisoned food on the thief. Whether the thief gets away with it, or whether the thief is caught and the food is put on the shelf, ha ha!

LE - Confront the thief and make him punish himself in such a degrading manner than even the shopkeeper begs to let him go. "No, good sir, if you don't make a lesson out of this miscreant, order will break down!"

NE - Execute the thief with the shopkeeper's knife. Demand the shopkeeper pay a bounty for catching the thief and hush money for not turning the shopkeeper in for killing someone over a small amount of stolen food.

CE - Sneak into the shopkeeper's living quarters, steal the undergarments of the shopkeeper's spouse, plant it on the thief. Ensure that the thief gets caught.

What all the players would say to the DM after the encounter is resolved: "How much XP? Do I get inspiration?"

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Basic Human Fighter (or whatever) is in a local store sees an obviously poor man steal something.

How would each of the alignment's react in your opinion?

LG - "Please, I insist, let me buy this for you--and after, we can work out how to fix this problem from here on out."
NG - "Put it back--I can help you get better." (Double meaning fully intended.)
CG - [furiously attempting to determine whether the victim of the theft is rich enough to afford it]
LN - "Stop, thief!" No hesitation.
TN - [furiously attempting to determine whether the reward for stopping a thief is worth the hassle]
CN - "No no, take this, it's much more [useful/valuable/nutritious/etc.]"
LE - "Please, I insist, let me buy this for you--and after, we can work out how you pay me back."
NE - "No no, take this, it'll hurt the bastards who run this place so much more."
CE - [furiously attempting to determine whether this would justify a murder in broad daylight, since that's still on her bucket list]

 

[EzekielRaiden]

How it would play out with some groups I've played with, who obviously didn't overthink these things:

LG - Take the thief to zero hit points and turn him in.

NG - Distract the shopkeep.

CG - Help the thief by stealing more valuable things and sleight of hand adding it to the thief's pockets ("Poor guy needs food. Let me fill his pockets with gold from the till!"). Feels bad when guards latter find the thief holding stolen goods worth a capital offense.

LN - Beat the thief, return the good, beat the shopkeeper for his lack of attention to security, demand the bounty "owed" him.

TN - Too cool to care. Does something completely detached from the encounter the DM set up.

CN - Plant some poisoned food on the thief. Whether the thief gets away with it, or whether the thief is caught and the food is put on the shelf, ha ha!

LE - Confront the thief and make him punish himself in such a degrading manner than even the shopkeeper begs to let him go. "No, good sir, if you don't make a lesson out of this miscreant, order will break down!"

NE - Execute the thief with the shopkeeper's knife. Demand the shopkeeper pay a bounty for catching the thief and hush money for not turning the shopkeeper in for killing someone over a small amount of stolen food.

CE - Sneak into the shopkeeper's living quarters, steal the undergarments of the shopkeeper's spouse, plant it on the thief. Ensure that the thief gets caught.

What all the players would say to the DM after the encounter is resolved: "How much XP? Do I get inspiration?"

It makes me very, very sad how poorly most folks play LG. There is no Good in the behavior discussed there. That is at best LN--and may be weakly LE.

 

[Celebrim]

It makes me very, very sad how poorly most folks play LG. There is no Good in the behavior discussed there. That is at best LN--and may be weakly LE.

Almost every alternative seems like NE as I outlined it in my response.

 

[steeldragons]

LG: Stop them. Return the item. More than likely, detain them til the watch arrives. If they got a good sob story, /maybe/, give the shop keep the money for it and/or let them go with a stern lecture on upholding the rules of society.
NG: Pay for it.
CG: Smirk.

LN: Run them down to the end of the world to return the item or bring the beggar to justice.
(T)N: Might pay for it. Might do nothing. Might go after the guy to get the item and return it, themselves/not get the guy in trouble or put them in jeopardy.
CN: Smirk. Steal something of their own in the bustle caused by the Lawfuls. Give whatever they took to the beggar, "Free of charge."

LE: Stop them...with extreme "prejudice." If the beggar is slain -which can probably be helped, but why would one bother saving some thieving vermin?- will return the item to the shop keep....and probably intimidate some form of recompense out of them.
NE: Shrug. Watch. IF they decided to stop them, they would do it to take the item for themselves and/or demand some kind of reward to return it to the shopkeeper.
CE: KILL 'IM!!! Shopkeep: "Where's the item they took?"...CE: "What item?"

 

[Crimson Longinus]

It makes me very, very sad how poorly most folks play LG. There is no Good in the behavior discussed there. That is at best LN--and may be weakly LE.

Look, according to Gygax it is obviously lawful good to murder non-combatants affiliated with the enemy, so arresting a criminal is nothing.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Look, according to Gygax it is obviously lawful good to murder non-combatants affiliated with the enemy, so arresting a criminal is nothing.

Given "according to Gygax" can be used, as like as not, to both defend and assail any given argument...

 

[EzekielRaiden]

LE - Follow him out, mug him for the stolen goods. Then report him to the guards to make sure he's put in his place, the dirty criminal. Justify it the same way all the other Lawful types do, only you're being honest.

When did Lawful become "Smugly Cruel"?

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Given "according to Gygax" can be used, as like as not, to both defend and assail any given argument...

It was not about how it should be, but an explanation for why people might see lawful good as judgemental bigots, because that's exactly how it originally was, and confirmed to be so by the creator of the game.

When did Lawful become "Smugly Cruel"?

Like I said, the origins of the system. Till this day my red flag is not the usual chaotic neutral rogue, it is the lawful good paladin.