-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
Alignment Question
- Thread starter Samothdm
- Start date
Artoomis
First Post
Lord Ben said:
What's the difference between an ambush of one individual and murder? Is there one?
It would be a bit different if you were carrying out a sentence of death from some legal authority. Then you are "respecting authority," which you otherwise are not. Of course, there is still the problem of Honor, which seems decidely lacking in your example.
I do think that ambushes are legitimate. Against monsters. Or animals. Or enemy units, even, perhaps. But against individuals it is little more than murder.
Last edited:
What's the difference between an army using surprise and a individual using surprise? Is there one?
Murder? Against a cleric with the holy symbol of an evil diety? Nope, that's preventative actions. There is no rule that says you need a jury of your peers in my world before being sentanced to death. Detect evil never fails, and paladins are never punished (by their god) for slaying evil. Paladins are judge, jury, and exocutioner as well.
It's fine really, if I played in a game you DM'd I wouldn't be a Paladin, and if you played in a game I DM'd I'd hope you wouldn't object if a paladin had ranks in hide and attacked with surprise.
Murder? Against a cleric with the holy symbol of an evil diety? Nope, that's preventative actions. There is no rule that says you need a jury of your peers in my world before being sentanced to death. Detect evil never fails, and paladins are never punished (by their god) for slaying evil. Paladins are judge, jury, and exocutioner as well.
It's fine really, if I played in a game you DM'd I wouldn't be a Paladin, and if you played in a game I DM'd I'd hope you wouldn't object if a paladin had ranks in hide and attacked with surprise.
Lord Ben said:
With an army, you are following a superiors orders, regardless of the alignment of the superior or their motives.
With an individual, especially a DND character, you should be following the dictates of the alignment. A lot of people wave alignment around as if it were a pair of underwear that they can change at will. They do this by attempting to justify actions that really do not fit that alignment such as saying "well, he had the unholy symbol of an evil deity".
The problem is, so what? Does that definitively make him a Cleric of that god? Maybe he is a NG Rogue/Spy trying to find out information on that temple and your LG character just ambushed and killed him (not talking about the specific example you mentioned, merely the type of encounter mentioned).
Did he do murder then?
That's WHY LG characters follow a set of rules for combat: to minimize mistakes like this.
Lord Ben said:
The Paladin does Detect Evil in your world, sees the guy is evil, and outright kills him. Opps. Didn't know that he was a NG Rogue/Spy trying to find out information on that temple and had an Amulet of Opposite Appearing Alignment on.
At least in my world, the Paladin would merely watch the guy and only confront him if he does something illegal or immoral.
Different strokes for different folks.
It's called moral challenges for the character. Everything is rarely black and white, even with detection spells.
First off DnD alignment is an absolute that is defined by the DM.
Secondly, I don't think that it would be that big of a deal for the Rogue to change to an evil alignment. First of all, there are no alignment changing penalties. Just don't tell the player, and definantly don't tell the other players. I doubt the Paladin or Cleric will detect evil on him. So, wuptee-do he is evil now and there are very few in game ramifications.
Point is, unless you are a Paladin or Cleric it makes very little difference if you are good or evil. And unless you are a Barbarian or a Monk it makes little difference if you are lawful or chaotic. In fact I don't think there is much of a reason for a player to know the alignment of his character. Just play a consistent personality and your DM should interpret your actions and motivations into an alignment. When I play and the DM asks me what my new characters alignment is I say 'You decide, here is my personality'.
*:> Scott
Secondly, I don't think that it would be that big of a deal for the Rogue to change to an evil alignment. First of all, there are no alignment changing penalties. Just don't tell the player, and definantly don't tell the other players. I doubt the Paladin or Cleric will detect evil on him. So, wuptee-do he is evil now and there are very few in game ramifications.
Point is, unless you are a Paladin or Cleric it makes very little difference if you are good or evil. And unless you are a Barbarian or a Monk it makes little difference if you are lawful or chaotic. In fact I don't think there is much of a reason for a player to know the alignment of his character. Just play a consistent personality and your DM should interpret your actions and motivations into an alignment. When I play and the DM asks me what my new characters alignment is I say 'You decide, here is my personality'.
*:> Scott
Artoomis
First Post
Lord Ben said:
Since this is the rules forum:
I still don't understand the difference between LG and CG in your world. If the only authority the paladin answers to is his own, the he is not practicing "obedience to authority," certainly. It seems like he has the "freedom, adaptability and flexbility" to fight evil in any way he likes. Gee - that's the definition of Chaos.
So once again I ask you - what is the difference between LG and CG in your world? Or is there no difference in their behavior at all - only in their philosophical outlook?
Last edited:
Similar Threads
