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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 3292102" data-attributes="member: 22779">Yup, he's got the right of it.Nope.  All actors are responsible for only the results of their actions.  That myth was brought up earlier talking about the BBEG threatening the puppy with extermination if the paladin didn't back down.  The BBEG is acting, not the paladin in killing the puppy.  The assassin kills the innocent, not the woodcutter.  The woodcutter's only action is in cutting down the tree.  What happens after that tree has left his possession (assuming some sort of mill) is not his responsibility.Exactly.  The motives and intents of the actor are secondary at best.  The DMG even calls this out specifically in the section on changing alignment.  You can think fluffy good thoughts all day long, but, if you are still eating puppies, you're evil.  <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=":)" />The direct result (note the direct part there) of the woodcutter cutting down the tree was the death of the child.  Killing is generally considered an evil act.  Granted, there are mitigating circumstances here, but, it's still an evil act.  I never stated that this guy is evilly aligned, nor would this act generally affect his alignment at all.  On the evil scale, it's tragic, but, not especially evil.The direct result of killing that dragon, OTOH, is the peace and prosperity of the land and those that live in it.  The specific act of killing isn't necessarily good, but, the direct results of that are.  Now, if, decades later, the kingdom is then overrun because the dragon is dead, it doesn't matter.  That's another actor taking actions and doesn't somehow retcon the original action of killing the dragon into an evil act any more than the assassin using the bow made from the tree the woodcutter cut retcons his action into evil.In other words, alignment doesn't time travel.  Actions have a particular alignment at the time they occur.  That doesn't get changed later because of the actions of other actors.I did backpedal somewhat.  Obviously some intent has to come into play.  I believe Psion said it best with his 1:3 ratio back a few pages.OTOH, let's look at your "following orders" example.  A superior tells you to stand over there and not move.  A child walks by and a tree falls on him.  You have not actually acted, therefore, your (in)action carries no alignment.  No thing that you did actually led causally to the death of that child.  Granted, you might have been able to prevent it, but, that doesn't matter.  Alignment is not determined by "what if" statements.  Alignment is only determined by what actually happened.  Alignment of an action is also only determined by those who take an action.Inaction, in other words, is irrelavent to alignment.  Watching someone drown is not an evil act even if you can prevent it.  Pushing someone into a raging river is.  Going back to the woodcutter for a moment.  If someone saw the child wandering around the trees and said nothing, is he guilty of an evil act?  How can he be when he actually did not take any actions?  If he had warned the child but the child still died, would he be guilty?  No, since it is not his actions which lead to the death of the child.  If he pushed the child under the falling tree, THEN he'd be guilty of an evil act.</blockquote>

Verification