-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
D&D 5E I need to make a withdraw from the local Treasury
- Thread starter Degwerks
- Start date
Haven't read the thread closely, but my advice would be this:
If you only want to do it to prove that you can or similar (and you also won't try to use your party for the plan) then I would suggest that you talk to your DM, try to set up a one-on-one session for this thing and see if you can pull it off. To avoid problems with the other players if they disapprove and as a way to avoid messing up the campaign I would also suggest doing as a "dream sequence". So regardless of whether you succeed or not the gold or the death or other consequences will not be a part of the ongoing campaign. And the one-on-one session idea is to avoid having the other players just sitting as an audience to something they don't care about (but maybe invite them if it sounds fun to them).
If you only want to do it to prove that you can or similar (and you also won't try to use your party for the plan) then I would suggest that you talk to your DM, try to set up a one-on-one session for this thing and see if you can pull it off. To avoid problems with the other players if they disapprove and as a way to avoid messing up the campaign I would also suggest doing as a "dream sequence". So regardless of whether you succeed or not the gold or the death or other consequences will not be a part of the ongoing campaign. And the one-on-one session idea is to avoid having the other players just sitting as an audience to something they don't care about (but maybe invite them if it sounds fun to them).
The Grassy Gnoll
Explorer
But he is Lawful Evil. Lawful. Unless the gold belongs to a state that he believes to be diametrically opposed to history home ideology, I don't think a LE would perform such a deed. CN, sure, CE yep, even CG if you're a Robin Hood. But LE? Nah.
Herobizkit
Adventurer
It seems like the plan itself is fairly well-reasoned, but as others point out, it might not be something a LE character might consider... UNLESS...
You said you had dealings with the 'lowbie' kingdom. Any chance you'd steal that gold and then offer it BACK to the lowbie king (melted down into bars or the like, of course) for some official land and title? THAT'S something a LE character _would_ do.
As a player who's played a TN Warlock and accomplished the same thing for different reasons (he wanted to bankrupt a rival nation's war effort), I say this is potential for lots of fun. Even more fun if you can implicate someone else for the theft.
You said you had dealings with the 'lowbie' kingdom. Any chance you'd steal that gold and then offer it BACK to the lowbie king (melted down into bars or the like, of course) for some official land and title? THAT'S something a LE character _would_ do.
As a player who's played a TN Warlock and accomplished the same thing for different reasons (he wanted to bankrupt a rival nation's war effort), I say this is potential for lots of fun. Even more fun if you can implicate someone else for the theft.
Like all alignments, Lawful Evil is commonly argued about.
Some people think it means you follow the laws of the country you are in, but you twist or pervert them to exploit others; e.g. a bureaucrat.
Some people think it means that although you are essentially evil, you have a strict personal code that is recognizable as such. One that you follow even if it is not totally advantageous. For example, perhaps you value your word of honor, even though you have no qualms about murder/torture/etc.
Others think that it means you gravitate towards using collectives/organizations (likely with their own customs/rules) rather than being a pure individualist just in it for himself. Certainly, many Lawful Evil monsters in the Monster Manual fit this criteria. They are clearly not following the laws of the land, but they have their own hierarchical structure that they respect. Mobsters would also fit this definition.
This is why, as a DM, it is always a terrible idea to try to "enforce" alignment. Your idea of what someone's alignment ought to be is different than their idea.
Pay attention to behavior, and if there are some specific, clearly defined behavioral requirements, then you can "enforce" those. e.g. Paladin oaths tend to have a few pretty clear actionable items. If you as DM state a game is not going to allow some specific thing, like no sex, or no torture, or whatever, then that's a behavioral item you can enforce.
But enforcing someone's alignment based on your interpretation of it? Nah. Recipe for unnecessary conflict and emotional outbursts. As demonstrated by Downlowd's extremely visceral response to this plan. My reaction to this plan would be very different. I'd let it play out, with success or failure (or success followed by swift retribution) left entirely up to what defenses are in place, what methods the heist uses, etc.
If it resulted in the thief being killed, or the whole party being killed... okay. Shucks, time to roll up some new characters. Not sure what the big deal is.
I don't specifically see much point to the endeavor, but it's also not particularly a huge red flag or anything.
Some people think it means you follow the laws of the country you are in, but you twist or pervert them to exploit others; e.g. a bureaucrat.
Some people think it means that although you are essentially evil, you have a strict personal code that is recognizable as such. One that you follow even if it is not totally advantageous. For example, perhaps you value your word of honor, even though you have no qualms about murder/torture/etc.
Others think that it means you gravitate towards using collectives/organizations (likely with their own customs/rules) rather than being a pure individualist just in it for himself. Certainly, many Lawful Evil monsters in the Monster Manual fit this criteria. They are clearly not following the laws of the land, but they have their own hierarchical structure that they respect. Mobsters would also fit this definition.
This is why, as a DM, it is always a terrible idea to try to "enforce" alignment. Your idea of what someone's alignment ought to be is different than their idea.
Pay attention to behavior, and if there are some specific, clearly defined behavioral requirements, then you can "enforce" those. e.g. Paladin oaths tend to have a few pretty clear actionable items. If you as DM state a game is not going to allow some specific thing, like no sex, or no torture, or whatever, then that's a behavioral item you can enforce.
But enforcing someone's alignment based on your interpretation of it? Nah. Recipe for unnecessary conflict and emotional outbursts. As demonstrated by Downlowd's extremely visceral response to this plan. My reaction to this plan would be very different. I'd let it play out, with success or failure (or success followed by swift retribution) left entirely up to what defenses are in place, what methods the heist uses, etc.
If it resulted in the thief being killed, or the whole party being killed... okay. Shucks, time to roll up some new characters. Not sure what the big deal is.
I don't specifically see much point to the endeavor, but it's also not particularly a huge red flag or anything.
EscherEnigma
Adventurer
Are you planning on springing this plan on the GM? 'cause alignment issues, what about the rest of the party, whether that's a reasonable amount for the treasury to hold and all those other logistical and ethical concerns aside, if you try to pull a heist and the GM isn't prepared, one of two things will happen. Either (A) everything will go according to plan because you steam-roll the GM based on your expectations or (B) everything goes horribly because the GM intuitively knows your plan has problems, but hasn't had time to properly examine it, so they throw in something like a silver dragon guardian that has True Sight or some-such and your character gets eaten.
However, if the GM knows that you're planning this (even if they don't know the details), then the place will probably have appropriate defenses, safe-guards, processes and so-on.
So yeah. My only concern? Does your GM know that you're planning a heist?
However, if the GM knows that you're planning this (even if they don't know the details), then the place will probably have appropriate defenses, safe-guards, processes and so-on.
So yeah. My only concern? Does your GM know that you're planning a heist?
Eltab
Lord of the Hidden Layer
Before you go one step further with your plan, read the list of spells in its entirety and ask yourself, "What would the Guardian of the Gold do with this spell if he had it?" Remember that governments are often RICH beyond mere individual experience, and can afford to place a high-level spell on something important / valuable. (Personally, I would put Glyph of Warding on every chest, with Alarm set to sound in the Main Barracks, should anything in the Treasury ever be moved or touched. I would make the whole floor an inside-out Circle of Protection Against Good and Evil with anti-Teleport barriers around the walls and ceiling.)
Also think about Goldfinger's plan. (Early James Bond movie.) He was not going to steal the gold from Fort Knox. He was going to make it radioactive poisonous, and therefore worthless.
Why don't you do something alchemical and yeast-like to a batch that you can reasonably acquire (say from the bottom of a dungeon), then "donate" it to the King and let it contaminate all his money?
More from the Kingdom of Sicily: one rich noble put his hoard in vases, then hung the vases in midair on chains from the ceiling. This way he could see if anybody cut the bottom out of his vase and stole his money.
Also think about Goldfinger's plan. (Early James Bond movie.) He was not going to steal the gold from Fort Knox. He was going to make it radioactive poisonous, and therefore worthless.
Why don't you do something alchemical and yeast-like to a batch that you can reasonably acquire (say from the bottom of a dungeon), then "donate" it to the King and let it contaminate all his money?
More from the Kingdom of Sicily: one rich noble put his hoard in vases, then hung the vases in midair on chains from the ceiling. This way he could see if anybody cut the bottom out of his vase and stole his money.
Similar Threads
