How does labelling an assassin neutral evil or lawful evil or whatever possibly tell me why s/he kills only bad guys? How is labelling the assassin evil going to provide any explanation of his/her morally-motivated restraint?
I’m running a game of Dungeon World for
@darkbard and his wife.
During the 1st session of play, his Paladin (Alastor) came across a grisly scene of a father and his two children murdered (Covingtons). Many sessions later we all have discovered that the father was journeying to secure a loan to pay down a debt (loan from rancher-lender Clemente Shaw) he took on because his ranch/farm has struggled horribly the last few seasons.
When darkbard’s Paladin and the eldest daughter (Rose Covington) were taking half of the crippled ranch’s cattle to a neighboring ranch to sell them, a posse of the big shot lender-rancher accosted them (mechanically, because of a Journey move complication) to take the cattle outright (because they are worth more than the Coin you liquidate them for).
After the sale of the cattle, darkbard’s Paladin and the daughter returned to confront the lender and pay off the debt. The ensuing social conflict immediately escalated with an I Am the Law move from darkbard’s Paladin. The big shot rancher-lender fled with his men attacking.
The daughter shot the rancher-lender dead even though he wasn’t in the fight. But she paid the Coin owed (a hefty sum in DW) to his ranch hands (who surrendered after the fight turned against them) to clear up the debt because “her Pa.”
What alignment is she? I (the GM) sure as hell didn’t know. I fleshed her out this way off the cuff because I found it thematically provocative given the character of the situation.
What about names? Is it the fact that her name is Rose and one of his Bonds was with his Goddess; “I shall find the Weeping Rose of Memna and give her comfort.” Her mother (Widow June Covington) broke down in ruinous grief at the news of her fallen family, but Rose did not cry at the news as she comforted her mother.
Yet the Paladin took this as Providence so she is now darkbard’s protege into his faith (which, prior to this event, all the Priests were male).
Would alignment have helped him make this decision?
Would an alignment system or a (non) distributed authority system at the table whereby the GM unilaterally judges PC (a Paladin’s especially) action and renders fiction x (you’re a heretic) and gamestate change y (you lose your divine powers and authority) have helped play?
If the answer to any of the above (What is Rose's alignment and therefore what social/physical moves should I make with her? Is the Paladin taking her on an act of heresy or providence?) is not helped by alignment or unilateral GM authority around alignment...in a situation that should be about D&D Alignment 101) what the hell good is it?