Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sigg" data-source="post: 2348700" data-attributes="member: 30546"><p>The only reference to time I saw was that they had suffered "numerous delays". Also, the gnomish city was described as "ancient", so unless I'm told to the contrary I'm assuming it's uninhabited...at least by the living (heck, maybe the city is where the Cold Ones are coming from in the first place). I have always interpreted the good alignment as being concerned with the sanctity of life. As a good person, my PC would never allow a child to come to harm....the law or chaos aspect would only determine what methods I would use to save the child. Now my LE fighter would have gladly allowed the child to perform his role in his tribe's society by sacrificing himself for his obvious betters. My good PCs would have considered the whole system of sacrificing children to be evil and repulsive...the difference would be that my CG PCs would be less concerned about preserving the tribe as a whole and would be more concerned with the children and their innocent parents, where LGs would be most likely to want save both the child and the tribe (they would view it as saving the tribe's lives AND delivering them spiritually from having to make such an evil choice). Heck....my CG PCs might even consider the tribal leadership evil and work to change the leadership structure to a "better" system once time and opportunity allowed. The NG of the deacon IMO would only mean more options in how to go about saving the tribe and preventing future sacrifices, but if I were playing him there would be no choice about whether to save the child's life...that would be a given. As to the child "wanting" to sacrifice himself "for the tribe", my answer (and hence the attitude of my PC) would be that the child didn't specifically want to sacrifice himself (read that as die), what he wanted was to save his people. I present as evidence that fact that he was fleeing as a lack of suicidal ideations. Therefore, my PC would reason that if the dual threat of the WWs and the Cold Ones were to be removed/neutralized then the child's wish to save his people would be fulfilled AND his life preserved. IMO any good character, whether lawful or chaotic, is definitely going against his alignment by not saving the child at least. My good PCs would be righteously outraged at the system of sacrificing children and although LGs might work to remove the true villians who demand the sacrifice, my CGs would do that plus take action against those in the tribe who promoted and maintained such a corrupt practice in the first place. If I were Dm I would be handing out xp penalties and alignment adjustments for any good characters (and especially the NG holy man) who allowed the horror to continue. If it turns out, however, that the "ancient gnomish city" is indeed inhabited and in imminent danger then all of this is changed of course <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>

Verification