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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="kreynolds" data-source="post: 282602" data-attributes="member: 2829">Actually, judging by your previous reply, it looks like you just about got it. Essentially, the player's reasons for doing something are paramount. They actually help you determine his alignment. Above, in your example, the Rogue gave you a perfectly reasonable reason why he was going to/did kill all of the bad guys. There was nothing evil in it. He had no other options:1) Let them go, fight them again.2) Untie them now, fight for my life.3) Leave them here alive, knowing we'll just have to fight them again.4) End this quickly and quietly, once and for all.5) Slit their throats and insanely giggle through my own drool.I know which one I would have picked. Given those options, a good aligned character would probably take there chances with option 3. Note, however, that only one of those options is truly evil, and that would be option 5.OK. I'll run down the list from above. If a lawful good character chose:1) Dangerous to alignment, as he is letting loose evil men upon the world, and it makes it worse because he had them under his arm of the law, but he let them go anyway. There is no lawful way to justify this action.2) His alignment probably isn't in any danger.3) His alignment very well might be in danger, as he is leaving known evil to run free in the world when he could apprehend them, no matter how difficult.4) Dangerous to alignment and not an option at all.5) Dangerous to alignment and not an option at all.If a chaotic neutral character chose:1) His alignment is in no danger.2) His alignment is in no danger.3) His alignment is in no danger.4) His alignment is in no danger.5) Dangerous to alignment and not an option at all.If a true neutral character chose:1) His alignment is in no immediate danger (though repeated behavior could cause a shift).2) His alignment is in no immediate danger (though repeated behavior could cause a shift).3) His alignment is in no immediate danger (though repeated behavior could cause a shift).4) His alignment is in no immediate danger (though repeated behavior could cause a shift).5) His alignment is in no immediate danger (though repeated behavior could cause a shift).How they react to this situation will be different. A lawful good character probably won't like the idea of slitting their throats, even if they are criminals. A chaotic neutral probably won't care, so long as he doesn't get blood on him. A true neutral probably doesn't give a damn about anything. Who would object? Obviously, the lawful good.How do you think they can justify slitting someone's throat? I can't go over every single little tiny possibility with all of the alignments. You have to decide what is good and what is evil. It seems to me that you have already decided that killing bound criminals is evil, but I don't think it is at all. It really depends on the situation.Half of the reasons why a character's alignment is the way it is are because of you. Your world influences the characters and their alignments. They will react a certain way to your world. They will grow in a certain way within your world. If your world is very "survival of the fitest", then almost all forms of killing are fair game and should not be cosidered evil.Like I said before, the only time killing is "truly evil" is in a utopian society, which doesn't exist, and shouldn't. There's nothing more boring.Don't force unreasonable alignment shifts upon your players. Don't make snap judgements about what is right and what is wrong, good and evil, without having put plenty of thought into it first, as your decision will greatly effect your players and their alignments. That's what I mean.Whoa-whoa-whoa-whoa-whoa...you're putting way too much importance upon class abilities in regards to alignment. That was not what I was saying. I was simply giving you a list of things that alignment effects. If your class won't be effected, then spells might be, or even magic items, etc.Nothing.Yes. Nothing.He didn't do anything inherently evil. If he repeated the activity over and over and over and over and over, then yeah, maybe it would affect his alignment. This act itself is not evil. His motivations were not evil. The act will never be evil. His motivations might one day, and that's when you alter his alignment.Yes you are. You posted this......so you have already established that killing is evil because it is against the laws and rules of the country, which is complete crap. A law never, ever makes something evil. NEVER. People can try to make a law make something evil, but it doesn't work.You said your players should know about these laws of the lands. You base your opinion that killing in this manner is evil based upon your laws and rules of the country, which don't have a thing to do with good or evil, yet you have done just that. You stated so yourself.This was the basis of your argument. Has that changed?It doesn't really matter what they would think. That isn't the only factor, and it certainly isn't the biggest. Like I said, you have to look at the action with cold, calculating clarity, void of emotion. If you can't do that, just do your best. It'll probably be enough.A person thinks they know what's evil. Does it make it evil? No. A country thinks they know what's evil. Does it make it evil? No. An entire world thinks they know what's evil. Does it make it evil? No. What makes it evil or not? You, the DM, looking at it with a fair and impartial eye.It doesn't matter. Evil people have friends too.Good question...Probably.Why?Yes. Because it's the law, and that is the only reason. You already stated, as I showed above, that good and evil in your campaign is defined by the laws of the land. Breakign the law is not evil in and of itself, but you seem to think so.That's crap. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> You defined the decent "good" thing to do with the laws and rules of the country and put it in concrete. To put it another way, you railroad your players into a particular style of play based upon alignment. So, in your game, alignment is defined by the laws, which doesn't make any sense.EDIT: Added a "wink" emoticon. It looked really bad without it. <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=":)" />Basically, you're problem is that you are blurring the line between law and morality. You have slapped them together and squished them into a single entity, which doesn't work very well.Law is only a small part of alignment. Evil is another small part. In your games, law defines morality, which in turn defines good and evil. Thus, if you break the law, you are evil by default. That is not how alignment works.</blockquote>

Verification