Alignment, clerics, and support

[Allandaros]

Those who consider Law/Chaos not much of a conflict should take a look at M. Moorcock's Elric saga - which probably contributed the entire Law/Chaos axis to D&D.

 

[Hussar]

Well, perhaps one sort of lawful but not all. Incidentally (tho this means nothing to this discussion) not helping someone in need if you can is against the law in many RL countries, it's a crime called "omission of aid".

I should have maybe worded that better. How about, letting the punishment fit the crime is a basic tenet of lawful? If Mr. Chaotic gets into a barfight and comes to the cleric afterward, not with life threatening wounds, but with numerous cuts and scrapes, I don't feel that the cleric of Law is under any compulsion to help him. I did mention if things were life threatening, it might make a difference. However, letting someone suffer for doing bad things isn't exactly going to cause a Lawful to lose any sleep.

 

[Voadam]

Those who consider Law/Chaos not much of a conflict should take a look at M. Moorcock's Elric saga - which probably contributed the entire Law/Chaos axis to D&D.

Sure, Gygax has said directly that it was his inspiration and that is why it started out with just that alignment axis.

And if you are playing in the Moorcock setting, Dragonlords of Melnibone, where the Lords of Law are conflicting against the Courts of Chaos then they probably do not want their divinely powered champions helping the other side.

But that does not describe the typcial D&D campaign to me. An elf of an elf god healing an evil drow sounds like more of a divine conflict issue than a lawful cleric healing a chaotic person in the typical D&D settings.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

If such a cleric refused to heal a wounded comrade because of his alignment (even if it was CE), what kind of cleric would he be? An evil cleric IMHO, or neutral at best, but definitely not good.

If the contrast Law vs Chaos in a certain setting is strong enough to make these questions a serious issue, then it's probably better to just suppose that two opposite characters would not adventure together since the start, unless they are forced to do so against their will.

In the BoED, it specifically makes mention of healing truely evil creatures as an evil act. After all, you are enabling that creature to go out and do more evil. Obviously, there is degrees of evil in this case. If you need the creature alive to help people, sure, do it. But it is Good's job to destroy Evil where they find it.

 

[kanithardm]

Law-chaos is a huge, real-world, material plane issue. Consider an adventure in a dwarven city. The town fathers ask your party (because of the dwarven fighter you serve with) to clear out a band of bards, ruffians, marauders, and malcontents who are preying on their fair city. Suddenly it turns out that these "malcontents" are merely artists who oppose the stringent rules of the dwarven city, and whose only crime is upsetting the "law and order" of the town by painting provokative murals.

There, my friend, is an adventure.

Thank you for this great idea.