Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="delericho" data-source="post: 4701888" data-attributes="member: 22424">You really have to discuss this with your group. Depending on how you read the 4e rules, it may well be that the DM does not have any authority to insist on an alignment-change, and that it is something for the player to (optionally) choose.Also, again depending on how you read the 4e rules, the behaviours you describe might not be out of bounds for a Good or Lawful Good character. 4e alignment can be read as being nothing more than a sort of &quot;metaphysical team-shirt&quot;, and as being neither descriptive nor proscriptive as far as PC actions are concerned. In other words, read strictly, a Lawful Good Paladin of the god of orphans can spend his off-hours indulging his hobby of burning down orphanages, and provided he remains willing and available to commit genocide on passing tribes of orcs at a moment's notice, he can remain Lawful Good, a paladin, and a chosen follower of his god.Of course, much more sane interpretations of the rules are possible (and, frankly, more likely to be the designer's intent). And so, I come back to where I started: you really have to discuss this with your group.As for consequences of changing alignment: clerics and paladins may have to choose new patron deities. And there are a couple of powers that specifically affect creatures of one alignment more than others (IIRC, one of the Cleric Paragon Paths has such a power). Other than that, there aren't really any rules-borne consequences. And in-world, there aren't any direct consequences of &quot;becoming Evil&quot; either, since there's no actual way to know. And, in a Points of Light setting, I doubt many people will object terribly strongly to a character who engages in the torture of Orcs.YMMV, of course.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="delericho, post: 4701888, member: 22424"] You really have to discuss this with your group. Depending on how you read the 4e rules, it may well be that the DM does not have any authority to insist on an alignment-change, and that it is something for the player to (optionally) choose. Also, again depending on how you read the 4e rules, the behaviours you describe might not be out of bounds for a Good or Lawful Good character. 4e alignment can be read as being nothing more than a sort of "metaphysical team-shirt", and as being neither descriptive nor proscriptive as far as PC actions are concerned. In other words, read strictly, a Lawful Good Paladin of the god of orphans can spend his off-hours indulging his hobby of burning down orphanages, and provided he remains willing and available to commit genocide on passing tribes of orcs at a moment's notice, he can remain Lawful Good, a paladin, and a chosen follower of his god. Of course, much more sane interpretations of the rules are possible (and, frankly, more likely to be the designer's intent). And so, I come back to where I started: you really have to discuss this with your group. As for consequences of changing alignment: clerics and paladins may have to choose new patron deities. And there are a couple of powers that specifically affect creatures of one alignment more than others (IIRC, one of the Cleric Paragon Paths has such a power). Other than that, there aren't really any rules-borne consequences. And in-world, there aren't any direct consequences of "becoming Evil" either, since there's no actual way to know. And, in a Points of Light setting, I doubt many people will object terribly strongly to a character who engages in the torture of Orcs. YMMV, of course. [/QUOTE]

Verification