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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="FireLance" data-source="post: 2825504" data-attributes="member: 3424">DM fiat, certainly, since the DM defines the set-up, what information the players are able to find out, and the consequences of their decisions. It need not be "illogical", though - it might only seem illogical because the characters aren't aware of all the pertinent information (like much of real life, actually, but I disgress). It wouldn't be much of a test of faith if all the information is known and the answer is obvious.But okay, I'll add something to the discussion that has nothing to do with DM fiat.Why do many people seem to assume that the Law is monolithic, and that Lawful Good, Lawful Neutral and Lawful Evil have the same idea of what are acceptable laws, or even the same concept of what Lawfulness is? For example, a Lawful Good and a Lawful Evil person would probably have very different opinions on a law whose only purpose is to protect the weak from the strong.When Lawfulness and Good conflict, the problem is usually due to the inadequacies of the law, at least, from a Lawful Good standpoint. The law may be incomplete or incorrectly applied, e.g. the example of fighting a lab fire with water (there must be a standard procedure for fighting lab fires). The law may be a Lawful Neutral law, e.g. you must always fulfill your bargains. A Lawful Good law would probably include an escape clause similar to "unless this results in Chaotic or Evil ends" (kind of like the paladin's code).A Lawful Good person following a perfect system of Lawful Good laws should never have to trade off Law for Good.</blockquote>

Verification