Alignment Riddle, Or "Is This Evil?" (Kind Of Long)
- Thread starter Villano
- Start date
I'm A Banana
Potassium-Rich
I would go out on a limb and say this guy is Chaotic Neutral.
He's definately not Good...the only people good guys kill are bad guys, not innocent bystanders.
But despite the human sacrifice, he did it for an ostensibly Good Cause (and not simply JUST for his own satisfaction).
He's approaching evil rapidly. But as long as he doesn't turn malicious, start killing everybody just to undo things, etc., no harm, no foul.
He's definately not Good...the only people good guys kill are bad guys, not innocent bystanders.
But despite the human sacrifice, he did it for an ostensibly Good Cause (and not simply JUST for his own satisfaction).
He's approaching evil rapidly. But as long as he doesn't turn malicious, start killing everybody just to undo things, etc., no harm, no foul.
DragonLancer
Hero
Regardless of his reasons, Simon went out his way to get the guy in the right place, had him tied up and then killed him in cold blood. In D&D thats an evil act, and I would definately change the characters alignment towards evil.
Trickstergod
First Post
Is the sacrifice an evil act? Why, yes, yes it is.
However, just presuming that Simon was of an ostensibly good nature (and alignment) before the sacrifice, and that he normally wouldn't have fathomed doing it beforehand, I do feel it worth stating that, while the deed certainly would be evil, if he were of a good alignment in the first place, he would maintain it. It would be a major slip-up, to be sure, but only paladins are disallowed the occasional intentional slip up. After all, if an evil character were to suddenly selflessly save a strangers life, would you shift the individuals alignment immediately to neutrality? Taking a life (particularly when, no matter how vile it might be, it does serve some good - though it's still evil) shouldn't outweigh saving a life, after all.
However, just presuming that Simon was of an ostensibly good nature (and alignment) before the sacrifice, and that he normally wouldn't have fathomed doing it beforehand, I do feel it worth stating that, while the deed certainly would be evil, if he were of a good alignment in the first place, he would maintain it. It would be a major slip-up, to be sure, but only paladins are disallowed the occasional intentional slip up. After all, if an evil character were to suddenly selflessly save a strangers life, would you shift the individuals alignment immediately to neutrality? Taking a life (particularly when, no matter how vile it might be, it does serve some good - though it's still evil) shouldn't outweigh saving a life, after all.
Villano
First Post
Kamikaze Midget said:
Well, the cop definitly wasn't "innocent". That's what led me to post in the first place, since the sacifice of an evil man led to an overall good.
And, I forgot to add this before, but the way the gods are presented in the movie, they aren't good or evil as we would look at things. They are neutral in the truest sense, i.e., they are so above humanity that we are usually beneath their notice.
So, it wasn't as if he sacrificed the guy to an evil deity.
This is what makes alignment so interesting. If a paladin had killed the cop in a battle, it would be accepted. But the sorcerer sacrificing the same guy the paladin would kill without thinking twice about in order to accomplish a much larger good (not ridding the world of a single evil man, but overthrowing an evil city) it may ironically be evil.
Maybe a sadstic DM could incorporate this into a game, especially if they have a PC paladin?
Mathew_Freeman
Adventurer
I think sacrificing a human is an Evil act, but it doesn't necessarily change a characters alignment to Evil after one act. However, any further Evil acts will very quickly shift the alignment to Evil.
Olive
Explorer
He sounds CN to me... after all sacrificing a sentient being to an evil god is an evil act, but one evil act does not an evil alignment make... this law of magic thingy sounds abit odd to me, i mean is there any arcane spellcaster who is chaotic then? i doubt it... so i say he's definitely chaotic, and definitely not good, but probably not evil yet.
The difference between sacrificing someone for your power in a way that makes an embodiment of evil (e.g. an evil god) more powerful too, and killing some one in combat or removing some one for the greater good (to cover the coup de grace example) is so obvious that i don't think it needs to be explained any further.
The difference between sacrificing someone for your power in a way that makes an embodiment of evil (e.g. an evil god) more powerful too, and killing some one in combat or removing some one for the greater good (to cover the coup de grace example) is so obvious that i don't think it needs to be explained any further.
Sejs
First Post
Simon's Alignment: True Neutral with Chaotic tendancies
(because tendancies are just so cool). He pretty much keeps to himself, he doesn't go out of his way to support The System (lawful) or the rights of The Individual (chaotic), but in some small ways he is more interested in the workings of people an a person by person basis than organizations as a body, whole. Towards the end, his chaotic tendancies become a bit more pronounced when he decides to 'take down the system' but this is a reaction to a situation rather than part of his personality on a deeper, core level.
Would I shift his Alignment?: No.
He doesn't undergo a change in central behavioral tendancies, he just responds to a situation. If certain things didn't happen to him first, than he wouldn't go out of his way to bring down the system, etc etc.
Is the sacrifice of the corrupt cop an evil act?: No.
It is a neutral act - the cop that was sacrificed was in no way innocent. He was a toady for the corrupt DA, who willingly sending people to prison that commited No Crime. Additionally, the purpose of the sacrifice wasn't an evil or selfish one - the point was to remove an evil organization by expediant, magical means. It's not a Shining Beacon of Goodness and Light kind of act, but by the same token, Simon isn't doing it to attain some pinnacle of personal power, or enslave people to his will, etc etc. Not evil, not -really- all that good.. leaves it Neutral.
(because tendancies are just so cool). He pretty much keeps to himself, he doesn't go out of his way to support The System (lawful) or the rights of The Individual (chaotic), but in some small ways he is more interested in the workings of people an a person by person basis than organizations as a body, whole. Towards the end, his chaotic tendancies become a bit more pronounced when he decides to 'take down the system' but this is a reaction to a situation rather than part of his personality on a deeper, core level.
Would I shift his Alignment?: No.
He doesn't undergo a change in central behavioral tendancies, he just responds to a situation. If certain things didn't happen to him first, than he wouldn't go out of his way to bring down the system, etc etc.
Is the sacrifice of the corrupt cop an evil act?: No.
It is a neutral act - the cop that was sacrificed was in no way innocent. He was a toady for the corrupt DA, who willingly sending people to prison that commited No Crime. Additionally, the purpose of the sacrifice wasn't an evil or selfish one - the point was to remove an evil organization by expediant, magical means. It's not a Shining Beacon of Goodness and Light kind of act, but by the same token, Simon isn't doing it to attain some pinnacle of personal power, or enslave people to his will, etc etc. Not evil, not -really- all that good.. leaves it Neutral.
Last edited:
Similar Threads
