D&D General The child stealing food to survive scenario, for alignment

[lingual]

Theft isn't good or evil it's more law/chaos.

LE. Kids gonna get treated harshly if caught.

LN. Will probably do whatever the law says. Might be lenient might be harsh.

LG. Will probably do what the law says but tempered by mercy and the law isn't likely very harsh.

What happens would depend on the level of social support in that society. Best case scenario charity helps the family out or adopts kid. Worst case kid is treated as an adult and loses a limb (very rarely death).

I'd have to say the motivations behind the theft would determine good/evil. Stealing from innocents can definitely hurt people and is definitely an evil act if done out of greed or plain cruelty.

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

Personally I think it depends more on the character than the alignment directly. Here's a couple of LG characters, let's see.

Lorallen, fairly typical human LG paladin of captain rank.
- Catching the urchin, he'd want to know details. Assuming poverty the reason and not organized crime, he'd connect the child/child's family to the orphanage and charity house he's patron of and tithes to.
- This couldn't occur within his stronghold's communal village which is short-handed given the work needed.

Sheenah, LG polymorphed Silver Dragon Sorceress.
- She would despair at yet another example of Human failings strengthening her resolve to install the Gold Dragon Emperor as benevolent overseer to enforce charity.
- At an immediate level she would pay the coin, as she admonishes the baker for not setting aside a portion for charity.

 

[Coroc]

A character of any alignment could respond in any way. Alignment is a tendency, not a restriction.

Cruddles, my CG Deep Gnome wizard, would likely help the kid escape and leave a few coins.

Lex, my CG human monk (who is a tad crazy), would capture the kid, force him to be honest, and then buy the bread for the kid as a reward for being honest. He'd also protect the kid if the punishment would be too steep from the constables.

Myztek Dryken Delerosh, a LG fighter/wizard, a former CE Thayvian under a helm of opposite alignment, would capture the kid, hand him over to the constables and say the law is the law.

Tyrstern Fossilrock, Mountain Dwarf NG barbarian, would place a bet on whether the kid was caught and would otherwise stay out of it.

Kyrus, the Jack of all Trades Elf, NE, would either ignore it, or use the situation to force the kid to work for him.

Crynare, my CN mage/thief, would steal the bread because it clearly meant a lot to the kid. He stole what people valued most.

Myska Urge, CG tiefling ranger/fighter/rogue/sorcerer, would capture the kid and teach him the importance of redemption, compelling him to do a greater service for the world than the harm he had just done.

While some of those might fit into your definition of their alignments, some of it won't - and that is ok. They're all being played as individuals with personalities. The alignment assigned to them is just the best fit, not necessarily a good fit.

sorry but better recheck your parties alignments:
Myztek is clearly LE

Tyrsten is clearly CN

Cynare definitely CE absolutely

and finally Myska LN

you might disagree, but then you better play without alignment at all because these are not even border cases.

 

[Coroc]

Gonna answer solely based on alignment, which is simply a moral tendency.

• LG - give the urchin a private reprimand (the law's too cruel), then pay for the food
• NG - give the urchin a warning, then give them some money
• CG - give the urchin some tips on how to not get caught in the first place, since theft is so dangerous, then give them some money
• LN - turn the urchin over to the authorities, but make a case for the urchin; perhaps offering to pay the cost of the food and a small fine
• N - pay no attention, as it's none of your business
• CN - smile and point out to the merchant that he's been robbed... describing someone completely different than the urchin
• LE - turn the urchin over to the authorities, or simply mete out the punishment yourself right there
• NE - blackmail the urchin to give you half, plus more each week unless they want the authorities to find out
• CE - kill the urchin and eat the stolen food; laugh mechanically

My current character is a LG far traveling gold dwarf from the Deephome. He has a great distaste for human society to begin with (playing Avernus, and spend every day in Baulder's Gate getting mugged), so he'd smile and walk away...

@jgsugden take these guidelines to better determine your groups alignment

 

[Flamestrike]

Funny thing is, this came up in a game once. My LG PC (leaning LN) saw a kid stealing something so he stopped him using a non-lethal force by knocking him down.

Everybody at the table was aghast. The baker was out that loaf of bread and would suffer because of the loss. Maybe it wouldn't bankrupt the baker, but the baker worked hard to earn money for his family, the kid didn't.

I explained that if the kid was hungry I'd throw in a few gold for an apprenticeship so he could earn his keep, but theft is wrong. If the kid got away with stealing a loaf of bread now, the lesson he learns is that he can get away with theft. In a couple of years it wouldn't be the loaf of bread, it would be the baker's earnings for the week.

The way I viewed it my PC saw a crime and stopped it using appropriate, non-lethal, means. People work hard for a living and taking something you didn't earn was wrong.

Fully grown men beating up little kids is also wrong.

 

[Flamestrike]

• LE - turn the urchin over to the authorities, or simply mete out the punishment yourself right there
• NE - blackmail the urchin to give you half, plus more each week unless they want the authorities to find out
• CE - kill the urchin and eat the stolen food; laugh mechanically

.

I hate the above depictions of evil. In particular your 'typical' CE behaviour.

Evil people dont go around just murdering and harming people for stupid petty reasons (although there certainly are a tiny few members of the evil alignment that do just that).

If a CE PC decides to burn down the tavern, killing the owner who shortchanged him a few SP over a nights accommodation, he's not just portraying a CE alignment, he's portraying a psychopath of the highest order. Ditto if he kills a random kid he saw stealing a loaf of bread.

Unless he's been going out of his way to depict a total nut-job who murders people over the most trivial of slights, or 'just for the lols', then it's also poor roleplaying and terrible characterisation.

Evil people are people who are prepared to use harm (murder, torture, slavery, assault) to get what they want. That doesnt mean they walk around murdering, torturing and enslaving people willy nilly, or in response to every perceived slight.

Titus Pullo from HBO's Rome is CE. Rick Sanchez is firmly CE as well. Both men dont go around murdering kids 'for the lols'.

Not every CE person is the Joker man.

 

[Oofta]

Fully grown men beating up little kids is also wrong.

Good grief. Who beat up a kid? My PC used the only non-lethal option he had to stop the kid, no permanent damage was done. My PC didn't even knock the kid unconscious, just knocked him down.

In my PC's mind, theft is wrong. By stopping the kid we accomplished a goal of stopping a theft. As an added bonus we also had a chance to help the kid which we never would have had otherwise.

So tell me again why I'm a bad person for having a PC react in what I considered an appropriate fashion given their morals?

 

[Cadence]

I hate the above depictions of evil. In particular your 'typical' CE behaviour.

Evil people dont go around just murdering and harming people for stupid petty reasons (although there certainly are a tiny few members of the evil alignment that do just that).

If a CE PC decides to burn down the tavern, killing the owner who shortchanged him a few SP over a nights accommodation, he's not just portraying a CE alignment, he's portraying a psychopath of the highest order. Ditto if he kills a random kid he saw stealing a loaf of bread.

Unless he's been going out of his way to depict a total nut-job who murders people over the most trivial of slights, or 'just for the lols', then it's also poor roleplaying and terrible characterisation.

Evil people are people who are prepared to use harm (murder, torture, slavery, assault) to get what they want. That doesnt mean they walk around murdering, torturing and enslaving people willy nilly, or in response to every perceived slight.

Titus Pullo from HBO's Rome is CE. Rick Sanchez is firmly CE as well. Both men dont go around murdering kids 'for the lols'.

Not every CE person is the Joker man.

I'm kind of befuddled about what in the description of CE makes you think someone CE wouldn't be a "psychopath of highest order".

"CE creatures act with arbitrary violence, spurred by their greed, hatred, or bloodlust." - 5e

"The major precepts of this alignment are freedom, randomness, and woe. Laws and order, kindness, and good deeds are disdained. Life has no value. By promoting chaos and evil, those of this alignment hope to bring themselves to positions of power, glory, and prestige in a system ruled by individual caprice and their own whims." - 1e

"These characters are the bane of all that is good and organized. Chaotic evil characters are motivated by the desire for personal gain and pleasure. They see absolutely nothing wrong with taking whatever they want by whatever means possible. -- The strong have the right to take what they want, and the weak are to be exploited." - 2e

"A chaotic evil character does what his greed, hatred, and lust for destruction drive him to do. He is viscious arbitrarily violent, and unpredictable. ... Chaotic evil represents the destruction not only of beauty and life, but also of the order on which beauty and life depend." - PF

How else would someone portray a person who is actively against all order (the reason 4e didn't allow chaotic good?) and only seeking their own benefit with no regard for others?

If you want them to not engage in that whim of randomly killing whoever they have the urge to, then isn't that NE?

Link with more: The Alignment System - Chaotic Evil

 

[Flamestrike]

I'm kind of befuddled about what in the description of CE makes you think someone CE wouldn't be a "psychopath of highest order".

"CE creatures act with arbitrary violence, spurred by their greed, hatred, or bloodlust." - 5e

And I know plenty of people like this in real life (people who are arbitrarily violent, and fuelled by hatred) and they dont walk around randomly murdering kids, burning down taverns and similar.

Think of a violent street criminal, or an outlaw motorcycle gang member.

While CE certainly encompasses extreme cases like the Joker, or Darth Vader, or full on murderous psychopaths of the highest order, it also encompasses anyone who is fine with harming people (assault; even murder, slavery, torture etc) and who lives outside the law.

It's the latter (people who are just fine with harming others, and are also living outside the law, or with a disrespect for society, order and tradition) that compromise the majority of CE people, with 'Jokers' and 'Vaders' being the extreme outlier.

 

[Flamestrike]

Good grief. Who beat up a kid? My PC used the only non-lethal option he had to stop the kid, no permanent damage was done. My PC didn't even knock the kid unconscious, just knocked him down.

What did you do to the kid exactly?

I presume you're playing a fully grown and heavily armed adult here.

If I saw an adult knocking a kid to the ground IRL, I'd look on aghast as well (like the other dudes at the table did).

Grabbing an urchin/ thief to stop them, or take them to the Law perhaps. Bashing them to the ground, hell no.